1  / 


< 


i 


'»:«.. 


/3 


"i- 


OF   THE 

Theological    Seminary, 

PRINCETON,    N.  J. 

Case, O  ^-"^ ...  ..P.iy.is.10'1 

Slielf,      ^*^C?  O       Sec: ion 

Book, 1.;.;^:..:.: 


^y,  .  ^  -      :^J^  >y*^^ 


yz 


,-  />^' 


"»■  v^^ 


THE 


cA   ^  "      <s^ 


0    h 

DOCTRINE 


DIVINE     EFFICIENCY, 


DEFENDED  AGAINST  CERTAIN 


MODERN  SPECULATIONS. 


I- 


BY    EDWARD    D.  GRIFFIN,  D.  D.      • 

PRESIDENT     OF     WILLIABIS     COLLEGE. 


'Love  the  Truth  and  Peace." Zech.  8.  19. 


NEW-YORK  : 

JONATHAN     LEAVITT,      182     BROADWAY, 

BOSTON : 
CROCKER  &  BREW.sTKR,  17  VVashiugton-street. 

1833. 


Entered  according  to  the  Act  of  Confess,  in  the  year  1833,  by  Jonathan  Leavitl,  in  the 
Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  Southern  District  of  New-York. 


WEST    &    TROW,    Printers 


CONTENTS. 


Page 

Introduction 5 

Chapter  I.     Dr  Fitch's  Theory 13 

Chapter  II.     Dr  Taylor's  Theory 43 

Chapter  III.     Notice  of  Two  Other  Writers 55 

Chapter  IV.     Meaning  and  Origin  of  Corrupt  Nature  ...     63 

Chapter  V.     Divine  Efficiency 73 

Chapter  VI.     Importance  and  Instrumentality  of  Truth  .  .  105 

Chapter  VII.     Scripture  Testimony  to  Divine  Efficiency  .  .  117 

Chapter  VIII.    Sinless  Creatures  Dependent  for  Holiness  .  .  165 

Chapter  IX.     God's  Power  to  Prevent  Sin 179 

Chapter  X.     Alleged  Dominion  of  Motives. — ^  Distinct 

Theory 203 


INTRODUCTION 


There  is  something  in  controversy  which  is  calculated 
to  awaken  unhallowed  passions,  even  when  the  object  is 
professedly  most  remote  from  personal  interest.  Religious 
controversy  is  therefore  in  itself  an  evil,  though  it  is  often 
necessary.  This  discussion  I  hope  to  conduct  with  good 
will  to  my  brethren,  all  of  whom  I  respect,  and  some  of 
whom  are  my  personal  friends.  I  consider  it  lawful  to 
examine  with  freedom  the  soundness  and  even  the  fairness 
of  their  arguments,  but  not  to  extend  my  censure  beyond 
the  reasoning.  I  regard  our  dependence  on  divine 
efficiency  as  one  of  the  sweetest  doctrines  of  the  Bible,  and 
know  it  to  be  most  deeply  felt  under  the  special  effusions 
of  the  Spirit.  Take  from  me  my  dependence  on  God, 
and  I  must  despair.  I  consider  too  the  honour  of  raising 
to  spiritual  life  a  world  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins,  as 
one  of  the  brightest  glories  of  the  Godhead ;  and  I  have 
been  grieved  at  my  very  heart  to  see  this  honour  taken 
away.  This  has  been  the  severest  cut  of  all.  These 
reasons   for  entering  into  this   discussion   will,  I  hope, 

1* 


INTRODUCTION. 


plead  my  cause  wifh  those  who  may  think  me  in  errour. 
Not  that  I  am  afraid  to  speak  for  God;  but  I  know  it  to 
be  my  duty  to  speak  in  a  way  least  offensive  to  my 
brethren,  and  least  calculated  to  grieve  the  Spirit  from  our 
churches  by  parly  strife.  But  I  may  be  permitted  to  call 
things  by  their  right  names,  and  intend  to  be  so  explicit 
as  to  make  the  theories  I  am  opposing  clear  to  ordinary 
capacities. 

By  divine  efficiency  I  mean  the  effectual  power  of  God 
immediately  applied  to  the  heait  to  make  it  holy.  This 
is  the  meaning  which  the  CalvinistJc  world  have  always 
given  to  i  lie  phrase ;  and  no  man  has  a  right  to  use  it  in 
another  sense,  lo  set  off  a  contrary  doctrine  or  otherwise. 
Nor  may  I  be  accused  of  wrongfully  cluirging  a  denial  of 
divine  efficiency,  because  some  may  choose  to  wrap  up 
another  doctrine  under  tljis  name. 

There  are  two  theories  of  modern  origin  abroad  in 
our  country  which  deny  this  doctrine,  and  more  or  less 
place  the  cause  of  holiness  in  motives  clearly  presented 
by  the  illuminating  Spirit.  One  of  these  is  understood  to 
have  proceeded  from  New-Haven,  and  to  owe  its  origin  to 
the  Bev.  Doctors  Taylor  and  Fitch,  Professors  of  Theology 
in  Yale  College.  This  system  plainly  denies  the  power 
of  God  fully  to  control  the  mind  by  motives.  The  other, 
which  is  adopted  by  here  and  there  an  individual,  as- 
cribes to  God  an  absolute  dominion  by  motives.  Both 
disclaim  the  self-determining  power,  on  account  of  the 
influence  allowed  to  motives  :  but  the  New-Haven  sys- 
tem as  plainly  involves  the  self-determining  power  as  did 
that  of  Arminius  himself.     I  shall  e.\amine  both  theories. 


INTRODUCTION.  7 

but  shall  direct  my  chief  attention  to  the  former,  as  occu- 
pying more  of  the  public  attention  and  involving  errours 
of  a  larger  size. 

Dr  Taylor,  in  treating  of  consideration  and  the  com- 
parison of  dilferent  objects  of  choice,  says,  "  We  have 
already  had  occasion  to  say,  that  to  deny  the  tendency 
of  the  acts  specified  to  produce  a  change  of  heart,  is  to 
maintain  the  doctrine  of  the  self-determining  power  of  the 
will."*  As  though  this  was  a  pretended  power  to  act 
without  motives.  And  a  writer  on  the  same  side,  in  a 
late  Periodical,  rejects  the  imputation  under  a  notion  that 
the  theory  of  the  self-determining  power  is,  that  the  will 
determines  the  will.  Now  Pres.  Edwards  did,  hij  way  of 
inference,  push  his  antagonists  into  this  inconsistency,  that 
the  will  is  determined  by  a  previous  act  of  the  will,  and 
that  therefore  there  is  a  volition  before  the  first  volition; 
but  no  Armininn,  I  believe,  wa,s  ever  willing  to  admit  into 
his  theory  this  inconsistency.  And  Pres.  Edwards  him- 
self, in  his  book  on  the  Freedom  of  the  Will,f  says,  "  I 
shall  suppose  that  the  Arminians,  when  they  speak  of  the 
will's  determining  itself,  do,  by  the  will,  mean  the  soul 
willing.  I  sliall  take  it  for  granted  that  when  they 
speak  of  the  will  as  the  determiner,  they  mean  the  soul 
in  the  exercise  of  a  power  of  willing. — I  shall  suppose 
this  to  be  their  meaning  because  nothing  else  can  be  meant 
without  the  grossest  and  plainest  absurdity."  They  meant 
to  say  that  the  man  himself  chooses,  unconstrained  by  a 
higher  power:  but  they  did  not  mean  to  say,  (though  this 
was  an  inference  drawn  from  their  arguments,)  that  he  has 

*  Christian  Spectator  for  1829  :  p.  486.         t  Lon.  Ed.  1790  :  p.  45. 


8  INTRODUCTION. 

that  choice  because  he  first  chooses  to  have  that  choice ;  for 
this  would  place  a  volition  before  the  first  volition.  They 
maintained  that  the  will  was  not  compelled  by  any  thing 
without ;  that  the  soul  was  free  to  act  or  not  act,  notwith- 
standing all  inducements  presented.  But  they  still  main- 
tained, (as  who  will  not?)  that  the  mind,  though  not 
forced,  was  uniformly  induced  by  the  stronger  motive.  The 
great  masters  of  Arminianism  who  are  quoted  by  Pres.  Ed- 
wards in  his  work  on  the  Will,  do  this.*  Dr  Turnbull 
approvingly  quotes  another  of  them  as  saying,  "  The 
will  itself,  how  absolute  and  incontrollable  soever  it  may 
be  thought,  never  fails  in  its  obedience  to  the  dictates 
of  the  understanding."  Mr.  Chubb  says,  "  No  action  can 
take  place  without  some  motive  to  excite  it."  "  Volition 
cannot  take  place  without  some  previous  reason  or  motive 
to  induce  it."  Dr  Whitby  says,  "  To  say  that — the 
greatest  good  proposed,  the  greatest  evil  threatened,  wlien 
equally  believed  and  reflected  on,  is  not  sufficient  to  en- 
gage the  will  to  choose  the  good  and  refuse  the  evil,  is  in 
effect  to  say,  That  which  alone  doth  move  the  will  to 
choose  or  to  refuse,  is  not  sufficient  to  engage  it  so  to  do; 
which,  being  contradictory  to  itself,  must  of  necessity  be 
false.  Be  it  then  so  that  we  naturally  have  an  aversion  to 
the  truths  proposed  in  the  Gospel ;  that  only  can  niake  us 
indisposed  to  attend  to  them,  but  cannot  hinder  our  con- 
viction when  we  do  apprehend  them  and  attend  to  them. — 
Be  it  that  there  is  in  us  also  a  renitency  to  the  good  we  are 
to  ciioose ;  that  only  can  indispose  us  to  believe  it  is,  and 
to  approve  it  as,  our  chiefest  good.     Be  it  that  we  are 

*  Patre  107—118. 


INTRODUCTION.  9 

prone  to  the  evil  that  we  should  decline ;  that  only  can 
render  it  the  more  difficult  for  us  to  believe  it  is  the  worst 
of  evils.  But  yet  what  we  do  really  believe  to  be  our 
chiefest  good,  will  still  be  chosen ;  and  what  we  appre- 
hend to  be  the  worst  of  evils,  will,  whilst  we  do  continue 
under  that  conviction,  be  refused  by  us.  It  therefore  can 
be  only  requisite,  in  order  to  these  ends,  that  the  good 
Spirit  should  so  illumine  our  understandings,  that  we, 
attending  to  and  considering  what  lies  before  us,  should 
apprehend  and  be  convinced  of  our  duty ;  and  that  the 
blessings  of  the  Gospel  should  be  so  propounded  to  us,  as 
that  we  may  discern  them  to  be  our  chiefest  good  ;  and  the 
miseries  it  threateneth,  so  as  we  may  be  convinced  that 
they  are  the  worst  of  evils ;  that  we  may  choose  the  one 
and  refuse  the  other." 

Here  is  the  New-Haven  divinity  entire.  Here  is  Dr 
Taylor's  constitutional  susceptibility  to  motives,  founded 
in  self-love  and  wrought  upon  by  the  good  contained  in 
truth.  Here  is  that  divine  illumination  which  fastens  the 
wandering  attention  to  truth  and  lets  in  upon  the  mind 
the  full  power  of  motives  ;  which,  with  the  mind's  own 
activity,  is  enough  without  divine  efficiency.  That  power 
of  action  which  requires  no  other  stimulus  than  motives 
enforced  by  divine  illumination,  is  the  very  self-determin- 
ing power  which  Whitby,  the  prince  of  Arminians,  main- 
tained. And  this  is  maintained  in  exact  form  by  the 
gentlemen  of  New-Haven,  though  Dr  Taylor  disclaims  the 
belief  because  he  admits  the  necessity  of  motives.  And 
who  does  not  ?  As  relates  to  divine  efficiency  and  motives 
and  divine  illumination,  the  gentlemen  of  New-Haven  per- 


10  IN'TRODL'CTIOX. 

fectly  agree  with  Whilby  and  Cliubb  and  Tiirnbnll  as  above 
quoted.  Some  of  the  Arminians  of  a  darker  age  did  indeed 
suppose  tliat  the  will  could  act  willioiit  molives.  But  this 
appendasje  was  not  essential  to  the  scll-delcimining  power. 
If  the  mind  moves  itself  to  holiness  in  view  of  motives  en- 
'  forced  by  tiie  illuminaLing  Spiiil,  without  divine  efliciency, 
while  it  is  competent  lo  reject  the  motives  and  is  not  abso- 
lutely controlled  by  them,  it  possesses  the  self-detefmin- 
ing  power.  And  the  New-Haven  brethren  will  not  deny 
that  this  is  their  exact  creed.  In  ex[)Iaining  their  system 
therefore  I  shall  unhesitatingly  ascribe  to  them  this  belief. 
But  wheiher  I  am  tliouglit  to  be  riglit  in  this  use  of  the 
phrase  or  not,  to  prevent  all  dispute  as  to  the  exact  impu- 
tation I  make,  I  hereby  announce  once  for  all,  that  I 
mean  by  tlie  self-determining  power,  a  competency,  (in 
every  sense  of  the  word,)  to  move,  in  view  of  motives,  with- 
out divine  efficiency,  and  a  competency  to  reject  the 
motives. 

Even  the  allegation  of  our  brethren  that  a  change  by 
divine  efficiency  would  be  only  a  i^hijskai  operation,  and 
that  no  change  is  moral  but  that  which  is  wrought  by  mo- 
tives, is  borrowed  from  the  old  Arminians. 

There  are  three  distinct  theories  respecting  the  cause 
of  the  holy  state  or  affections  of  the  mind.  One  is,  that 
it  is  the  power  of  the  Spirit  immediately  applied  to  the 
mind,  to  give  it  a  holy  temper,  or,  as  others  say,  to  make 
it  fall  in  with  the  motives  presented  in  divine  truth. 
Another  is,  that  the  cause  lies  in  the  motives  themselves, 
set  clearly  before  the  understanding  by  the  illuminating 
Spirit.     This  is  that  theory  which  asserts  the  absolute  do- 


INTKODUCTTON. 


11 


minion  of  mofivos.  Tlie  third  is,  that  the  mind  turns  it- 
self, without  any  action  of  God  but  that  which  presents 
motires  ;  witlioat  any  molives  but  those  which  the  mind  is 
in  all  respects  competent  to  resist,  and  which  many  do 
finally  resist.  The  cause  then  certainly  lies  in  the  self- 
determining  power.  Here  is  nothing  but  the  illuminating 
Spirit,  tiie  light,  and  the  mind  deciding  for  itself  whether 
to  fall  in  with  the  motives  or  not.  This  is  exactly  the 
self-determining  power  maintained  by  Whitby,  and  this 
is  precisely  the  New-Haven  theory. 

I  suppo.se  Dr  Taylor  and  Dr  Fitch  to  agree  in  their 
theory  ;  but  as  each  has  exhibited  a  different  part,  I  shall 
examine  their  writings  separately.  As  Dr  Fitch  has 
spread  out  the  system  more  at  large,  I  shall  give  him  the 
first  place :  and  as  his  Review  of  Dr  Fisk's  Sermon  has 
been  set  up  by  some  of  the  leading  advocates  of  the  new 
doctrines,  as  a  fair  exposition  of  their  opinions,  I  shall 
attend  chiefly  to  that. 


CHAPTER  I. 

Or  Fitch's  Theory,  tis  exhibited  in  his  Rcvieto  of  Dr  Fish's 
Discourse  on  Predestination  aiul  Election.  Christian  Spectator, 
Dec.  1831. 

The  theory  exhibited  in  this^Review  is,  one  half  of 
the  way,  pure  Arminianism ;  and  the  other  half,  it 
assumes  the  high  language  of  Calvinism,  with  an  Armi- 
nian  meaning  two  thirds  of  the  way,  and  for  the  other  third, 
i  Calvinistic  meaning  wholly  at  variance  with  the  rest  of 
the  system.  I  Avill  first  spread  out  the  theory  so  plainly 
that  every  one  can  understand  it,  and  secondly,  show  by 
copious  extracts  that  it  is  indeed  w^hat  I  represent. 

Dr  Fitch  says,  (putting  his  thoughts  into  my  own  lan- 
guage.) that  if  God  should  attempt  to  make  men  )ioly  by 
efficient  power,  they  would  not  be  holy  after  all,  for  they 
would  not  be  moral  agents ;  that  all  he  can  do  is  to  throw- 
truth  upon  their  understanding  and  conscience  by  his  illu- 
minating Spirit,  and  leave  the  result  to  the  self-determining 
power,  which  is  capable  of  yielding  to  the  motives  and 
capable  of  resisting  any  influence  which  God  can  bring ; 
that  God  does  the  best  he  can  by  his  Spirit  for  every  indi- 
vidual, and  therefore,  (if  I  understand  him,)  as  much  for 
•me  as  another ;  that  he  has  taken  the  best  measures  he 

•2 


14  DR  fitch's  theory. 

could  to  keep  out  sin,  and  could  not  succeed  any  further 
without  destroying  the  freedom  of  creatures  and  rendering 
them  incapable  of  sinning ;  that  he  has  taken  the  best 
measures  he  could  to  recover  men  from  the  ruins  of  the 
fall,  and  has  done  all  he  could  for  each  individual  consist- 
ently with  the  general  interest  of  holiness  in  our  world, 
and  could  not  succeed  with  a  greater  number ;  that  God 
ibresaw  that  if  he  gave  being  to  creatures,  and  brought 
forward  such  a  system  of  government  and  grace,  Peter 
and  John,  by  the  self-determining  power,  would  accept  his 
offers,  and  that  Judas  would  reject  them ;  that  this  fore- 
seen preponderance  of  good,  (say,  two  to  one,)  was  the 
motive  which  induced  God  to  create  and  to  bruig  forward 
such  a  system  of  government  and  grace;  that  his  deter- 
mination to  do  all  this  when  he  foresaw  the  result,  was  it- 
self the  predestination  of  all  things,  even  of  sin,  and  par- 
ticularly was  the  election  of  Peter  and  John  and  the  rejec- 
tion of  Judas.  Thus  far  the  system,  (except  the  language 
of  the  last  proposition,)  is  pure  Arminianism. 

At  this  point  he  turns  short  about,  and  employs  the 
highest  Calvinistic  language,  but  witli  a  meaning  entirely 
Armhiian.  He  says  that,  bj'  the  word  and  Spirit,  God 
rnsures  the  regeneration  of  Peter  and  John,  and,  according 
to  an  eternal  purpose,  selects  them  from  the  ruins  of  the 
apostacy.  He  presses  the  doctrine  of  election  in  the  strong- 
est possible  terms.  But  how  does  God  ensure  regenera- 
tion ?  and  what  is  the  election  contended  for  ?  Why,  he 
ensures  the  regeneration  of  Peter  and  John  by  urging  upon 
them  motives  to  which  he  foresaw  that  they,  by  the  self- 


DR  fitch's  theory.  |/> 

determining  power,  would  yield.  In  this  way  alone  he 
selects  them  from  the  ruins  of  the  apostacy  ;  and  his  mere 
determination  to  do  this,  was  the  eternal  decree  of  election. 
This  is  no  other  regeneration  or  election  than  any  Armi- 
nian  would  agree  to  if  he  would  consent  to  use  such  lan- 
guage. Indeed  Dr  Fitch  plainly  tells  Dr  Fisk,  (a  consist- 
ent and  highly  respectable  Arminian  Methodist,)  that  he 
ought  to  believe  in  the  same  election  if  he  holds  to  fore- 
knowledge :  and  Dr  Fisk  in  his  answer  tells  him  that  he 
does,  but  reproves  him  for  the  illusory  language  in  which 
he  has  wrapt  it  up. 

Thus  two  thirds  of  the  last  half  of  the  way,  viz.  through 
regeneration  and  election,  he  uses  high  Calvinistic  lan- 
guage with  an  Arminian  meaning.  The  other  third  of 
the  last  half  of  the  way,  viz.  through  perseverance,  he 
holds  Calvinistic  language  and  supports  the  Calvinistic 
theory,  but  with  entire  inconsistence  with  the  rest  of  the 
system.  If  God  does  nothing  for  Peter  but  offer  motives 
which  the  self-determining  power  is  to  yield  to  or  reject, 
there  are  a  million  of  chances  to  one  that  Peter  will  fall 
away.  Satan  fell  away  from  perfect  holiness ;  Adam  fell 
away  from  perfect  holiness :  a  million  to  one  that  Peter 
will  fall  away  from  imperfect  holiness,  in  a  world  full  of 
temptations,  with  all  his  appetites  and  former  habits  set 
against  him,  unless  he  is  "  kept  by  the  power  of  God 
through  faith  unto  salvation."  I  beg  to  know  what  makes 
it  certain  that  a  single  Christian  will  persevere.  God's 
foreknowledge?  That  foresees  a  thing  already  certain, 
but  does  not  malce  it  certain.  How  comes  it  then  to  pass 
that  every  regenerated  man,  from  Adam  to  his  youngest 


10  DR  fitch's  theory. 

son,  perseveres  to  the  end?  How  came  it  to  pass  that 
God,  not  as  a  mere  prediction  of  what  the  self-determining 
power  would  do,  but  as  a  promise  of  what  he  himself 
would  accomplish  in  reward  of  Christ,  pledged  himself  to 
him  that  they  all  should  remain  steadfast  ?  This  doctrine 
of  perseverance  can  consist  with  nothing  but  God's  abso- 
lute dominion  over  the  mind,  either  by  efficiency  or  by 
motives.  If  this  doctrine  is  true  the  rest  of  Dr  Fitch's 
theory  falls. 

Now  then  for  the  proof  of  these  assertions.  Dr  Fitch 
says,  "We  earnestly  object  to  that  Antinomian  scheme 
which  makes  grace  terminate  solely  on  dispensing  with 
free  agency ;  by  an  act  of  mere  omnipotence  creating  a 
new  heart,  and  thus  leaving  none  of  the  elements  which 
constitute  the  moral  certainty  of  a  conversion  in  the  agent 
himself"*  "  If  Dr  Fisk  wishes  to  show  that  God  does 
not  create  the  volitions  of  moral  agents,  he  has  our  hearty 
consent."t  "  Dr  Fisk  maintains,  and,  we  think,  truly, 
that  any  act  of  the  creature  brought  into  existence  hy  the 
mere  efficiency  of  God,  cannot  be  an  accountable  act."| 
In  that  passage,  "  No  man  can  come  to  me  except  the 
Father — draw  him,"  for  drmo  he  reads  induce  ;§  confining 
the  whole  operation  to  the  mere  influence  of  motives.  He 
says  approvingly,  Dr  Fisk  "  maintains  that  God  is  not 
the  sole  agent  in  the  universe ;  that  there  is  an  entire  and 
complete  cause  of  moral  action  lying  out  of  him,  in  the  ex- 
istence of  a  free  agent.  Such  an  agent  then,  on  Dr 
Fisk's  principles,  has  power  to  sin  notwithstanding  any 
amount  of  influence  which  Jiis  Maker  can  bring  upon  him 
*  633.  \  599.  t  GOO.  §  G37. 


DR  fitch's  theory.  17 

short  of  destroying  his  freedom.  Does  Dr  Fisk  know, 
can  he  prove,  that  of  beings  who  have  thus  the  power  to 
sin,  any  moral  system  could  have  been  formed  in  which 
some  of  these  beings  would  not  use  that  power?  Can  he 
prove  that  the  alternative  presented  to  God  in  creation  teas 
not  this ;  no  moral  system,  or  a  system  in  which  some  of 
his  subjects  woidd  ccbuse  the  high  prerogative  of  freedom 
and  i'ebel?'^*  This  is  enough  to  show  his  opinion  re- 
specting the  power  of  God  to  control  by  motives  in  rege- 
neration. For  if  by  motives  God  could  infallibly  bring 
back  the  depraved  Peter  and  all  other  selected  sinners, 
by  motives  he  could  in  all  cases  have  prevented  the  fall  of 
spotless  spirits. 

God's  "  purpose,"  continues  Dr  Fitch,  "  was  to  confer 
on  the  beings  composing  his  moral  kingdom,  the  power  of 
volition  and  choice,  and  to  use  the  best  influence  God  coidd 
use  on  the  lohole  to  secure  the  holiness  and  prevent  the  sin 
of  such  beings,  loho  themselves,  and  not  he,  were  to  have 
immediate  power  over  their  volitions. — And  it  is  still  true 
that  he  desires  their  obedience, — and,  without  hindering 
the  return  of  any,  uses  cdl  the  influence  he  can  without  sa- 
crificing a  greater  good,  to  induce  them  to  return."t  Now 
if  there  is  any  frankness  in  these  expressions,  their  mean- 
ing must  be,  that  God  does  as  much  by  his  Spirit  for  one 
as  another ;  for  if  he  does  the  best  he  can  for  all,  he  can 
do  no  more  for  a  part.  If  there  is  any  reservation  made 
by  such  expressions  as  "on  the  whole,"  and  "without 
sacrificing  a  greater  good,"  nothing  at  all  is  said.  If  Dr 
Fitch  means  only  that  God  does  the  best  he  can  for  each 

*  C04.  t  615. 


18  DR  fitch's  theory. 

consistently  with  the  highest  good  of  the  universe,  he  says 
no  more  than  the  strongest  advocate  for  efficiency  would 
allow.  And  such  a  limitation  of  a  universal  proposition, 
designed  to  assert  God's  utmost  efforts  to  recover  indepen- 
dent beings,  would  not  be  fair.  But  he  goes  on.  "  What- 
ever degree  or  kind  of  influence  is  used  with  them,  to  fa- 
vour their  return  to  him,  at  any  given  time, — is  as  strongly 
favourable  to  their  conversion  as  it  can  he  made  amid  the 
obstacles  lohich  a  world  of  guilty  and  rebellious  moral  agents 
oppose  to  God's  ivories  of  grace."  In  a  note  he  says,  "  We 
do  not  mean  that  these  influences  do  not  become  more 
powerful  at  future  times,  [as  knowledge  increases,  I  sup- 
pose ;]  but  at  each  moment  God  is  able  to  say.  What  more 
could  have  been  done  to  my  vineyard  that  I  have  not 
done?"*  Then  surely  he  does  as  much  by  his  Spirit  for 
one  as  another  according  to  the  knowledge  they  possess ; 
at  all  events  he  cannot  absolutely  control  the  mind  by  mo- 
tives. The  writer  proceeds.  "  Human  rebellion  and  wick- 
edness— oppose  obstacles  to  a  work  of  grace  in  our  world, 
and  hindrances  to  salvation,  which  the  God  of  grace  can- 
not  wholly  overcome ;  and — the  measures  of  grace  now  pur- 
sued—overcome those  obstacles  to  a  further  extent  than 
any  other  system  of  measures  would  do."t  He  does 
"  every  thing  to  encourage  and  persuade  them  to  return, — 
which  he  can  do  amidthe  obstacles  opposed  by  their  sins."\ 
"  He  couldnot  effect  more  as  a  whole,  to  recover  those  who 
had  destroyed  themselves. "§  God  "desires  from  the 
heart  that  all  men — comply ; — brings  all  those  kinds  and 
all  that  degree  of  influence — upon  each  individucd,  which 
*e32.  i  G33.  iC34.  §  G21. 


DR  fitch's  theory.  19 

a  system  of  measures  best  arranged  for  the  success  of 
grace  in  a  world  of  rebellion  allows."*  "  The  purpose  of 
election"  brings  God  into  measures  "  to  gain  loJiom  in  the 
methods  of  his  wisdom  he  can."f  And  yet,  (with  what 
consistency  let  others  judge,)  he  asks,  "Why  do  given 
sinners  repent  ? — Does  God  use  no  influence  and  means 
to  induce  sinners? — Are  these  influences  and  means 
brought  to  bear  alike  on  all  nations  and  on  all  individ- 
uals?"! If  "lotj  w^t^^  what  propriety  could  it  be  so  often 
said,  he  does  the  best  he  can  for  all  consistently  with  the 
general  interest  of  holiness  in  our  world  ? 

According  to  Dr  Fitch,  God  foresaw,  not  what  he 
would  do,  either  by  efficiency  or  the  absolute  control  of 
motives,  but  what  the  self-determining  power  would  do  if 
he  created  such  beings  and  placed  them  under  such  a 
system  of  government  and  grace  ;  and  that,  antecedent,  in 
the  order  of  nature,  to  any  design  on  his  part  even  to  create  ; 
for  this  foresight  of  what  the  self-determining  power  would 
do  if  created,  was  the  very  motive  which  induced  him  to 
create  and  to  bring  forward  such  a  system  of  government 
and  grace ;  and  this  decision  to  create  and  to  enter  on 
such  measures  when  he  foresaw  the  result,  was  itself  the 
decree  of  election, — was  itself  the  predestination  of  all 
things,  not  excepting  sin  itself  Hear  Dr  Fitch.  "  God's 
foreknowledge  of  what  would  be  the  results  of  his  present 
works  of  grace,  [results  proceeding  neither  from  efficiency 
nor  the  absolute  control  of  motives,]  preceded,  in  the  order 
of  nature,  the  purpose  to  pursue  those  toorks  and  presented 
the  grounds  of  that  purpose.     [The  grounds  therefore  of 

*635.  +638.  t631. 


20  DR  pitch's  theory. 

creation ;  for  the  whole  creation  was  comprehended  in  the 
plan  of  redemption.  "  All  things  were  created  by  him, 
(Christ,)  and  for  him."]  Thus  Peter,  when  writing  to 
the  brethren, — states — that  through  the  calls  of  the  Gos- 
pel— the  Holy  Spirit  induced  them  to  obey  ; — and  in  this 
very  %vay,  according  to  the  foreknowledge  of  God,  were 
they  chosen  to  this  happy  state. — Thus  too  Paul — refers  to 
the  fact  that  such  persons  are  '  the  called  according  to  his 
purpose ;'  and  adds,  as  we  should  paraphrase  the  passage, 
'  For  whom  he  did  forcknotc,'  as  the  people  who  ivould  he 
gained  to  his  holy  kingdom  by  his  present  works  of  graee, 
(in  which  result  lay  the  whole  objective  motive  for  under- 
taking these  ivorks,)  '  he  did  also,'  by  resolving  on  those 
works,  '  predestinate  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his 
Son;'  and  by  performing  those  works  he  calls,  justifies, 
and  glorifies.  Foresight  then  of  the  good  results  in  sinners 
redeemed,  ichich  the  present  measures  of  grace  if  pursued 
would  secure,  is  asserted  to  precede  the  prospective  election 
of  them  in  the  ctcrncd  purpose  of  God,  and  the  accom- 
plished election  of  them  through  the  influence  of  the  Spirit. 
The  passages  therefore,  while  they  fully  maintain  a  per- 
sonal election  made  by  God,  contradict  alone  that  idea  of 
It  which  considers  the  selection  of  particular  individuals  as 
the  first  thing  in  the  order  of  nature,  and  not  as  the  forcr 
seen  residt  of  God's  using  with  a  world  of  sinners  the  best 
means,  (including  the  influence  of  the  Spirit,)  for  their 
recovery."*  Thus  their  prospective  election  was  only  a 
determination  to  bring  forward  such  a  system  of  grace  and 
persuasion,  when  it  was  foreseen  who  would  be  persuaded  ; 

*  622, 3. 


DR  fitch's  theory.  21 

and  their  accomplished  election  was  only  the  bringing  for- 
ward of  the  system  with  such  foreknowledge.  Hear  him 
again.  "  God,  foreseeing  with  certainty  that  Adam  would 
freely  act  in  that  manner  if  created  and  placed  on  trial, 
did  still  determine  to  create  him  and  place  him  on  trial ; 
and  THUS  determined  that  such  an  event  [as  the  fall]  should 
take  place  and  in  just  such  a  manner.  This  certainly  is 
predestination  *  according  to  the  counsel  and  foreknowledge 
of  God.'  "*  "  In  what  sense  are  we  to  understand  the 
position  that"  God  "purposes  the  existence  of  sin?  Not 
necessarily  in  the  sense  of  his  preferring  its  existence — to  its 
non-existence. — In  affirming  the  doctrine  of  predestination, 
we  affirm  no  more  necessarily  than  that  God,  with  the 
knowledge  that  these  beings'  would  sin  in  despite  of  the 
best  measures  of  providence  and  government  he  could  take, 
purposed  to  create  them  and  pursue  those  measures,  not 
for  the  sake  of  their  sin,  but  for  the  good  which  he  never- 
theless saw  it  was  possible  to  secure  in  his  moral  kingdom. 
This  would  be  a  purpose — to  permit  its  existence  rather 
than  to  have  no  moral  system. — Nothing  more,  touching 
free  agency,  is  implied  in  the  purpose — than  a  certainty, 
foreseen  of  God,  that  if  he  creates  and  upholds  that  being, 
and  pursues  icise  and  good  measures  of  providence, — the 
being  will  at  a  given  time  freely  choose  in  a  given  man- 
ner "i  "  God  then,  for  any  thing  that  has  been  shown  to 
the  contrary,  may  have  predetermined  the  existence  of  the 
sin  which  now  takes  place  in  his  kingdom,  not  for  the  rea- 
son that  he  prefers  sin — to  holiness, — but  simply  for  this 
reason,  that  he  chooses  to  do  the  most  he  can  for  the  good 
"  603.  t  612. 13. 


22  DR  FITCH'S  TIIEORV. 

of  a  moral  system  ;  to  prevent  sin  and  promote  holiness  to 
the  greatest  extent  possible  in  such  a  kind  of  system.  •  Sin, 
where  it  now  occurs,  may  be  regarded  by  him  as  an  evil,  and 
only  an  evil,  and  yet,  [as  an  evil  imavoidahle,  as  to  his  pre- 
vention, in  a  moral  system,)  it  may  he  reduced  to  the  least 
possible  Vunits  and  overruled  in  the  best  jwssible  manner."* 
Dr  Fisk  "  must  acknowledge  that  God  might  choose  to  cre- 
ate and  place  under  moral  government  the  present  universe 
of  beings, — as  one  in  which  he  could  do  the  most  possible  to 
check  and  restrain  sin  and  redeem  from  its  power. — Now 
would  the  resolution  to  give  such  good  to  creatures — be  in 
fact  a  predetermination  of  all — events  ?"t  "  Election  is 
resolved  simply  into  a  gracious  purpose  to  pursue  the  best 
possible  measures  for  the  salvdt  Ion-  of  sinners  ;—w-tchich  mea- 
sures are  foreseen  with  certainty  to  result  in  the 'salvation 
of  a  particular  number  only  and  not  the  whole.  As  to  that 
explanation  of  the  doctrine  which  denies  that  God  is  deal- 
ing with  free  agents  who  have  the  absolute  power  of  choice, 
andivho  can  resist  cdl  measures  taken  for  their  welfare,  and 
which  resolves  renewing  grace  into  a  simple  act  of  creative 
omnipotence,  we  frankly  admit  that  it  does  load  the  doc- 
trine with  the  charge  brought  against  it."|  "  The  purpose 
of  election  rightly  interpreted  then,  in  our  view  brings  the 
God  of  justice  and  grace  into  immediate  contact  with  our 
rebellious  world,  staying  the  execution  of  justice  and  urg- 
ing gracious  terms  of  reconciliation  on  men,  on  purpose  to 
bring  the  matter  to  a  speedy  issue  and  to  gain  whom  in 
the  methods  of  his  wisdom  he  can"^  Thus  election  is  only 
the  decision  of"  God  to  send  the  Gospel,  with  his  gracious 
*  G07.        t  G04.        1 635.        6  G36. 


DR  FITCIi's  THEORY,  -IS 

providence  and  illuminating  Spirit,  to  do  the  best  they  can 
for  the  recovery  of  all  men,  foreseeing  at  the  same  time  the 
results.  Again,  "  God  purposed  to  introduce  his  mea- 
sures of  grace  and  to  conduct  them  in  the  manner  he  does, 
foreseeing  the'  exact  results  they  would  have  in  the  reco- 
very of  fallen  men. — What  if  by  these  measures  of  redemp- 
tion some  men,  through  their  free  compliance,  are  taken, 
and  others  in  their  refusal  are  left  ?"*  "  God,  with  this 
knowledge  of  the  results,  is  still  willing  to  go  forward  with 
the  measures  of  his  grace,  and  tlms  elect  to  salvation  and 
harden  in  sin. — To  this  influence,"  [the  drawing  of  God,] 
the  sinner  "  can  yield,  and  be  thus.drawn  of  the  Father  ; 
this  influence  he  can  resist,  and  thus  harden  his  heart 
against  God.  Election  involves  nothing  more  as  it  respects 
his  individual  case,  except  one  fact,  the  certainty  to  the 
divine  mind  ichcther  the  sinner  will  yield — or — continue  to 
harden  his  heart  till  the  measures  of  grace  are  withdrawn,  "t 
Thus  itseems  that  some  sinners  finally  turn  away  from  those 
drawings  of  the  Father  mentioned  in  John  C.  44.  Again, 
"  The  purpose  of  election — is  a  purpose  on  the  part  of  God 
to  carry  forward  his  works  of  grace  such  as  they  are,  in  the 
^P^  very  manner  he  does,  in  foresight  of  the  exact  results  they 
will  have  in  inducing  men  to  comply. "|  "  God,  by  deci- 
ding on  his  present  measures  of  grace,  chose  from  among 
the  lost  the  heirs  of  salvation."'^  "  The  end  is  secured  hy 
the  means.  The  purpose  of  God  to  employ  the  means,  tvith 
a  certain  hiowledge  that  they  would  secure  the  end,  is  the 
only  proper  account  of  his  purposing  and  fixing  the  end."\\ 
"  We  would  only  ask  Dr  Fisk  whether  in  employing  these 

*634.        1637.        1634.        §686.        |1  624. 


•24  DR  FITCU'S  THEORY. 

means  in  the  manner  he  does,  God  did  not  foresee  what 
individuals  would  comply  and  be  saved.  We  ask  again, 
whether  in  jjurposing  to  employ  these  means  in  the  manner 
he  does,  God  did  not  purpose  that  those  individuals  should 
comply  and  thus  be  saved.  And  what  is  this  but  a  per- 
sonal election  to  salvation?"* 

After  quoting  a  passage  from  Dr  Fisk,  asserting  the 
gracious  restoration  of  the  lapsed  power  of  the  will,  he 
.says,  "  Supposing  this  scheme  to  be  true  in  all  its  parts, 
and  to  contain  the  whole  truth  on  the  subject,  we  would 
inquire  whether  in  thus  placing  a  world  on  the  footing  of 
moral  agency  through  a  gracious  restoration  of  lapsed 
power,  God  does  not  foresee  who  will  and  who  will  not 
abuse  this  gracious  power.  If  he  does  not  see  that  any 
will  use  it  aright,  then  why  does  he  grant  it  ?  If  he  does 
this,  then  he  knows  who  they  are  individually.  And  pur- 
posing  to  dispense  his  grace  to  those  individuals,  he  purposes 
that  they  shall  he  saved.  We  see  not  therefore  hut  on  his 
(nvn  principles  Dr  JF^isk  must  either  acknowledge  the  actucd 
salvation  of  all  men,  or  a  personal  election  in  the  purpose 
if  God  to  restore  the — lapsed  poioer  of  the  children  of 
Adam."i  This  was  a  precious  confession,  dropt  out  in 
an  unguarded  moment,  that  the  election  he  had  been 
pleading  for  was  fully  consistent  with  Arminian  principles  ; 
was  what  every  Arminian  ought  to  believe,  and  every  one 
else  who  admits  the  foreknowledge  of  God. 

After  all  this,  who  would  have  expected  to  hear,  m  the 
next  breath,  that  God  actually  selects  the  heirs  of  salvation 
from  the  rest  of  the  world  by  rendering  their,  regeneration 

^G20.  tG31. 


DR  fitch's  theory.  25 

certain  1  And  how  does  he  render  it  certain  ?  Why,  by 
using  the  means  which  he  foresaw  the  self-determining 
power  in  some  would  snifer  to  prevail,  in  others  would 
defeat.  If  I  invite  ten  men  to  my  house,  do  I  select  five, 
merely  because  I  foresee  that,  without  any  discriminating 
act  on  my  part,  only  five  will  come  ?  But  let  him  speak 
for  himsejf  "The  question  is,  how  comes  any  man 
to  comply  with  this  condition? — Does  not  God  secure 
that  compliance?  Does  he  not  elect  the  individuals 
who  shall  thus  voluntarily  obey?"*  "His  influences 
— render  certain  the  return  to  God  of  all  who  ever  do 
return."!  "  We  have  solely  one  question  to  try.  Is  it  a 
fact  that  God  elects  from  the  impenitent  and  unbelieving 
the  individuals  who  repent  and  believe  ?— How  come  par- 
ticular persons  to  be  believers  ?  Does  God  actually  in  his 
government  induce  persons  to  submit  and  believe  ?  Does 
he  do  any  thing  which  \\e  foresees  will  actually  secure  the 
submission  and  faith  of  those  very  persons  who  become 
submissive  believers  ?  In  other  words  the  question  is, — 
whether  God  by  the  dispensations  of  providence  and  grace 
actually  secures  all  existing  faith.  That  he  does  we  hold 
to  be  a  fact,  and  the  great  fact  involved  in  what  is  said  in 
the  Scriptures  on  the  subject  of  election. "|  "  We  con- 
tend that"  election  "  always  involves  in  it  another  point, — 
viz.  the  purpose  of  God  which  secures  the  repentance  and 
faith  of  those  particular  persons."  ||  Now  look  here. 
"  Wliatever  is  the  degree  of  influence  lohich  he  uses  with 
them,  it  is  not  in  its  nature  irresistible ;  but — men  as  free 
agents  still  Icecp  to  their  guilty  choice  in  resistance  to  it,  or 
through  its  operation  freely  give  up  their  idols  and  place 

^619.  1623.  1622.  |1631, 2. 

3 


26  DR  fitch's  theory. 

their  hearts  on  God."*  Now,  in  a  fair  use  of  language, 
does  such  an  influence  exerted  on  Peter  render  Peter's 
action  certain,  when  he  is  the  cause  of  his  own  action, 
and  has  a  sufficiency  in  himself  to  refuse  to  act  let  his 
Maker  do  what  he  will?  Can  God's  illuminating  influ- 
ence which  many  resist,  but  which  he  merely  foresees  that 
Peter  will  allow  to  prevail,  be  said  to  ensure  Peter's  com- 
pliance? Suppose  Esther  had  been  a  prophetess,  and 
had  foreseen  that  her  intercession  with  Ahasuerus  would 
convert  him  to  the  cause  of  the  Jews ;  would  it  be  proper 
to  adopt  the  high  Calvinistic  language  in  the  case,  and 
say  that  she  decreed  the  conversion  of  Ahasuerus,  and 
ensured  it,  and  elected  him  to  be  the  saviour  of  the  Jews  ? 
Aiid  yet  such  language  might  be  applied  to  that  case  as 
correctly  as  to  this.  God's  determination  to  urge  motives 
which  he  foresees  will  owe  their  success  to  a  power  in  the 
creature  independent  of. his  control,  is  God  decreeing  the 
event!  Now  with  this  understanding  of  the  interposition, 
is  it  fair  to  apply  to  it  the  highest  language  that  the  ad- 
vocates of  efficiency  have  ever  employed  ?  It  may  serve 
to  hide  the  alien  form  of  the  theory  and  cover  it  with  an 
orthodox  guise ;  but  I  appeal  to  the  universe  if  it  is  fair. 

It  is  not  necessary  to  make  quotations  to  prove  that 
Dr  Fitch  holds  strongly  to  the  doctrine  of  perseverance. 
This  will  not  be  denied. 

Dr  Fisk,  in  his  Reply  to  this  Review,t  holds  the  fol- 
lowing language.  "  If  I  understand  the  reviewer — he  is 
— in  principle  an  Arminian. — The  reviewer's  whole  ground 
of  defence — is  solely  this  Arminian    explanation   of  the 

'  632.         t  Christian  Advocate,  May  11,  1832. 


DR  fitch's  theory.  27 

doctrine  of  predestination.  He  acknowledges,  nay  boldly 
asserts,  in  a  strain  of  rugged  controversy  with  his  brethren 
who  may  differ  from  this  view  of  the  subject,  that  there  is 
no  other  explanation  by  which  the  arguments  of  the  ser- 
mon can  be  avoided ;  that  is,  as  I  understand  it,  the  only 
way  to  avoid  the  arguments  against  the  doctrine  of  Calvi- 
nian  predestination,  is  to  give  it  up  and  assume  the  Armi- 
nian  sentiment. — I  cannot  approve  of 'the  reviewer's  use  of 
terms.  Though  to  my  understanding  he  has  evidently 
given  the  doctrine  of  predestination,  not  merely  a  new 
dress,  but  a  new  character,  yet  he  more  than  intimates 
that  it  is  the  old  doctrine  with  only  a  new  method  of  ex- 
planation.— And  so  confident  is  the  reviewer  that  he  still 
believes  in  the  fact  of  predestination  in  the  old  Calvinistic 
sense,  that  in  stating  his  sentiments  on  this  subject,  he 
uses  the  same  forms  of  expression  which  Calvinists  have 
used,  when  their  meaning  was  as  distant  from  his  as  the 
two  poles  from  each  other. — I  feel  safer  in  understanding 
the  reviewer  in  an  Arminian  sense,  because  he  and  some 
others  take  it  very  ill  of  me  that  I  have  represented  them 
as  Calvinists. — By  God's  foreordaining  whatever  comes  to 
pass,  he  only  means  that  God  foresaw  that  sin  would  cer- 
tainly take  place,  and  predetermined  that  he  would  not 
hinder  it,  either  by  refraining  from  creating  moral  agents, 
or  by  throwing  a  restraint  upon  them  that  would  destroy 
their  free  agency ;  in  short,  that  he  would  submit  to  it  as 
an  evil  unavoidably '  incident  to  the  best  possible  system, 
after  doing  all  that  he  wisely  could  to  prevent  it.  This  is 
foreordaining  sin  !  This  is  predetermining  that  it  should 
be  I     I  cannot  but  express  my  deepest  regret  that  a  gentle- 


28  DR  fitch's  theory. 

man  of  the  reviewer's  standing  and  learning,  should  lend 
his  aid  and  give  his  sanction  to  such  a  perversion  of  lan- 
guage,— to  such  a  confusion  of  tongues. — Do  the  words 
predestinate, — foreordain, — decree,  mean  in  common  lan- 
guage, or  even  in  their  radical  and  critical  definition, 
nothing  more  than  to  permit, — not  ahsoluiely  to  hinder, — 
to  submit  to  as  an  tinavoidable  but  offensive  evil?  The 
reviewer  certainly  will  not  pretend  to  this, — The  use  of 
these  terms  by  those  who  believe  as  I  understand  the  re- 
viewer to  believe,  is  the  more  unjustifiable,  because  they 
are  used  by  most  Calvinistic  authors  in  a  different  sense. 
Why  thei^  should  the  reviewer,  believing  as  he  does,  con- 
tinue to  use  them  in  the  symbols  of  his  faith  ?  Different 
persons  might  give  different  answers  to  such  a  question. 
For  one  I  would  prefer  he  should  answer  it  himself — His 
mode  of  explanation — turns  the  doctrine  into  Arminianism. ' 
— ^But  the  sermon  was  never  written  to  oppose  those  who 
hold  to  the  decrees  of  God  in  an  Arminian  sense:  Why 
then  does  the  reviewer  complain  of  the  sermon  1 — It  seems 
that  Calvinism,  in  its  proper  character,  is  as  obnoxious  to 
the  reviewer  as  to  the  author  of  the  sermon. — If  it  is  safer 
to  attack  Calvinism  in  this  indirect  way,  I  will  not  object. 
— But  I  cannot  see  that  it  would  be  safer.  An  open  bold 
front  always  ends  best. — As  I  understand  the  reviewer, 
from  the  days  of  John  Calvin  down  to  the  present  hour, 
there  is  on  this  point,  between  the  great  body  of  Calvinists 
and  himself,  almost  no  likeness  except  in  the  use  of  words. 
Theirs  is  one  doctrine,  his  another.  Why  then — does  he 
hail  from  that  party  and  hoist  their  signals;  and  then, 
after  seeming  to  get  the  victory  by  espousing   the   very 


DR  fitch's  theory.  29 

cause  of  the  assailed,  encourage  the  Calvinists  to  triumph 
as  if  their  cause  had  been  successful  ?" 

These  remarks  of  the  President  of  the  Wesleyan 
University  of  Connecticut,  appear  to  me  candid  and  judi- 
cious, and  go  far. towards  exposing  the  unhappy  incon- 
gruity between  the  language  and  the  sentiments  of  this 
Review. 

Since  writing  the  above  I  have  seen,  in  the  Christian 
Spectator  for  December  1832,  an  article  from  the  same 
pen  on  the  Divine  Permission  of  Sin ;  referring  to  several 
publications  by  which  the  Review  and  the  system  had 
been  assailed.  I  shall  make  a  few  extracts  in  confirma- 
tion of  some  of  the  foregoing  remarks  and  in  illustration  of 
others.  In  the  supralapsarian  scheme,  which  Dr  F  con- 
demns, "  it  is— assumed,"  he  says,  that  God's  "  direct  effi- 
ciency— is  such  that  he  can  rely  on  that  alone  to  secure 
any  conceivable  result  tvhatcver. — Now  to  affirm  that  God, 
in  this  manner,  selects  a  part  for  holiness  and  blessedness, 
and  leaves  the  rest  to  sin  and  misery,  is  placing  the  sub- 
ject on  the  ground  of  mere  arbitrary  will."*  "  We  have 
begun  with  very  obvious  facts,  that  moral  agents  have  the 
power  of  choice,  and  that  their  voluntary  conduct  is  not  the 
result  of  immediate  propidsion  or  direct  creation."f  God 
"purposes  to  conduct  his  own  works,  [of  creation  as  well 
as  grace,]  in  the  particular  manner  he  does,  in  view  of  the 
results  which  will  certainly  ensue, — and  for  the  sake  alone 
of  the  good  which  lies  in  these  results,  as  being  the  highest 
good  he  can  secure."|  The  infralapsarian  scheme,  which 
he  approves,  is  this.    "  God,  foreseeing  the  conduct  which 

*  617.  t  619,  Note.  t  618. 

3* 


30  DR  fitch's  theory. 

will  certainly  ensue  on  the  different  measures  it  is  possible 
for  him  to  take  with  a  moral  kingdom,  purposes  to  pursue 
those  measures  which  will  secure  the  best  possible  result. — 
It  supposes  that  there  may  he  obstacles  in  the  nature  of  a 
moral  kingdom  which  render  it  impossible  for  him  to  give 
universal  efficacy  to  any  original  scheme  of  moral  govern- 
ment or  subsequent  scheme  of  redemption.  It  supposes 
therefore  that,  as  the  first  thing,  he  decides  upon  that 
course  of  means  and  measures  which  he  foresees  will  on 
the  whole  most  overcome  hindrances  and  carry  holiness  to 
the  farthest  extent  possible,  considering  a  whole  universe 
in  all  ages.  Such  a  purpose  is,  by  consequence,  the  pur- 
pose of  all  that  conduct  in  his  creatures  tvhich  is  certainly 
to  ensue.  That  is,  the  general  purpose  to  use  the  power 
of  moral  government  and  redemption  in  the  manner  first 
seen  to  be  the  best  possible,  is,  by  consequence,  the  speci- 
fic election  of  Gabriel  rather  than  Lucifer,  and  of  Paul 
rather  than  Judas."*  Now  take  from  the  universe  divine 
efficiency  and  the  absolute  dominion  of  motives,  and  what 
did  God  foresee,  but  merely  how  creatures,  by  the  self- 
determining  power,  would  treat  the  motives  presented  in 
his  government,  providence,  and  grace  ?  He  foresaw  that 
Peter  would  yield  to  them  and  that  Judas  would  reject 
them.  And  seeing  this,  his  very  decision  to  create  these 
beings  and  to  bring  forward  this  system  of  motives,  was 
itself  the  election  of  Peter  and  the  rejection  of  Judas.  As 
the  submission  of  Peter  and  the  obstinacy  of  Judas  were 
acts  equally  independent  of  him,  one  was  decreed  as  much 
as  the  other,  except  that  no  measures  were  taken  to  induce 

*  617,  18. 


DR  fitch's  theory,,  31 

Judas  to  sin.  So  says  the  writer.  "  He  foreordains  the 
existence  of  sin  as  really  as  the  existence  of  holiness,  and 
he  predestinates  to  wrath  as  really  as  to  mercy."* 

Dr  F  denies,  not  only  divine  efficiency,  but  the  abso- 
lute dominion  of  motives.  "  We  affirm  that  the  causes  in 
kind  which  originate  sin,  beinff  inseparably  inherent  in  a 
moral  universe,  may  so  accumulate  in  degree,  wider  every 
system  of  providence  and  government  which  can  be  pursued, 
as  to  render  sure  the  occurrence  of  sin.' ^f  "His  purpose 
is,  not  only  to  use  the  law,  but  so  to  carry  on  his  works  of 
creation  and  providence  with  a  universe,  as  to  secure  the 
highest  possible  amount  of  obedience. — And  if  he  prefers 
obedience — to — sin,  he  will  do  cdl  that  is  possible  to  secure 
obedience  in  his  creatures :  and  if  it  is  not  possible  to  SC' 
cure  from  them  all  that  he  prefers,  he  ivill  secure  all  that  is 
possible."'^ 

Dr  F  takes  up  above  fifty  pages  in  proving  that  God 
could  not  have  prevented  sin.  And  the  bare  supposition 
that  he  rejected  a  sinless  universe  which  was  possible,  for 
the  sake  of  displaying  his  glory,  seems  to  fill  the  writer 
with  horrour.  And  he  imagines  the  angels,  on  hearing 
the  story,  to  unite  in  saying,  "  Show  us  a  God  who,  able 
to  advance  the  holiness  of  the  universe  forever  and  to  pro- 
tect it  from  all  the  inroads  of  sin,  does  nevertheless,  in  the 
choice  of  his  heart  respecting  a  whole  universe,  actually 
reject  such  protection,  and  prefer  to  gratify  his  subjects 
with  a  mere  exhibition  at  the  expense  of  the  sin  and  misery 
of  one  or  many  of  his  subjects ;  and  we  shall  always  see 
him  purposely  leading  off  the  holy  into  sin  and  preferring 

*618.  1622.  tC53. 


32  DR  fitch's  theory. 

their  rebellion  to  obedience  : — and  in  all  his  conduct  to- 
wards sinners,  from  first  to  last,  we  shall  never  see  any 
wisdom,  any  goodness,  any  holiness,  any  justice,  any  mercy, 
but  the  mere  caprice  that  starts  aside  from  all,  simply 
to  make  an  exhibition  which  throws  eternal  horrour  into  all 
our  hearts.  God  on  the  throne  stepping  aside  from  the 
office  of  ruler  and  protector,  to  assume  the  mere  pageant, 
and  sacrificing  to  his  caprice  multitudes  of  his  creation."* 
This,  I  am  aware,  is  said  in  opposition  to  the  theory  that 
God  chose  the  existelice  of  sin  merely  to  honour  himself 
But  it  is  bold  language.  In  my  lips  it  would  be  blasphemy; 
for  I  believe  that  God  could  have  prevented  sin,  and 
would,  had  he  not  seen  it  a  means  of  blessing  the  universe 
by  filling  it  with  his  glory.  Now  who  would  have  thought, 
after  this  daring-  attack  upon  one  of  the  conceivable  mo- 
tives for  permitting  sin,  that  the  writer  was  willing  to  have 
it  understood  that  he  wc.s  not  certain  whether  sin  was  vo- 
luntarily permitted,  (that  is,  could  have  been  prevented,) 
or  not  ?  "  We  have  ventured  to  assert  that  a  demonstra- 
tion cannot  be  obtained  from  the  hands  of  man  either  on 
the  side  of  the  affirmative — or — the  negative."!  Amidst 
all  these  bold  and  confident  arguments  against  the  power 
of  God  to  prevent  sin,  he  repeatedly  stops  to  tell  us  that  he 
means  no  more  than  that  the  thing  is  possible  or  probable 
or  highly  probable  :  and  he  actually  charges  Dr  Woods 
with  "  injustice"  for  alleging  that  Dr  Taylor  had  maintain- 
ed this  point  as  true,  when,  (as  it  is  said,)  he  had  only 
spoken  of  it  as  possible. t     I  hope  we  shall  have  no  more 

*  644.  I  C48.  i  621,  Second  Note. 


DR  fitch's  theory.  33 

books  written  to  bring  the  world  to  believe  as  cardinal 
truths  what  the  writers  themselves  deem  only  possible. 

And  why  on  this  subject  should  there  be  a  doubt  1 
God  cannot  control  the  mind  by  efficiency  nor  yet  by  mo- 
tives ;  for  it  is  confidently  alleged  that  sinners  are  compe- 
tent to  resist  any  influence  which  he  can  bring  to  regene- 
rate them.  Can  he  then  keep  every  creature  in  the  uni- 
verse in  all  ages  right  by  any  providential  influence?  If 
I  understand  Dr  F,  this  last  is  the  influence  to  which  he 
often  refers.  He  says  "  that  God,  not  only  entertains  the 
purpose  to  treat  his  subjects  according  to  their  character, 
but  also  to  regulate,  in  tlie  best  manner  possible,  all  that 
injluence  in  his  kingdom  which  determines  character.  God 
can  vary  his  own  acts  in  the  creation  of  moral  agents  and 
in  his  providence  and  government  over  them,  in  ways  that 
are  endless  ,■  and  as  it  is  through  these  acts  that  he  controls 
and  regulates  the  influence  which  determines  character, 
he  can  vary  that  influence  in  ways  as  endless."*  "  Man — 
cannot  tell  what  a  single  change  in  the  present  providence 
of  God  will  certainly  effect  in  the  volitions  of  a  single  be- 
ing."t  One  had  spoken  of  the  "  series  of  conditions"  in 
which  God  places  his  creatures,  and  Dr  F  says,  "  By 
conditions  we  are  to  understand  here  precisely  that  kind 
and  degree  of  influence  which  meets  each  individual  at 
each  time  he  acts."|  Now  will  any  one  pretend  that  by 
this  providential  influence  God  could  have  prevented  sin, 
when  he  could  not  prevent  it  by  efficiency  or  by  motives  ? 
But  Dr  F's  whole  system  is  built  upon  the  assumption  that 
God  has  employed  all  sorts  of  influence  to  the  utmost  limit 

*  616.  t  649.  -t  645,  Note. 


34 


DR  FITCH  S  THEORY. 


of  his  power,  to  promote  the  holiness  of  the  universe, 
and  particularly  of  this  world,  in  all  its  generations  I  sup- 
pose. Whether  he  would  admit  that  God  can  send  the 
Gospel  to  the  heathen,  or  light  to  the  ignorant  in  Christen- 
dom, faster  than  he  does,  I  doubt.  He  may  think  that  all 
the  influence  God  could  have  employed  could  not  have 
sent  more  than  one  Noah  to  the  antediluvian  world,  or 
more  missionaries  to  the  heathen  in  the  early  ages  or  now. 
Ill  the  infinite  complication  of  God's  affairs,  what  particu- 
lar difficulties  may  be  contemplated  as  lying  in  the  way, 
I  know  not.  Dr  F  introduces  another  hinderance, — the 
want  of  the  prayer  of  faith.  "  He  could  with  propriety  do 
more  for  the  salvation  of  men — if  more  acceptable  prayer 
were  offered  for  the  object. — God  prefers  that  men  would 
at  all  times  and  in  all  places  offer  up  acceptable  prayer ; 
and — he  does  all  that  he  can  wisely  to  excite  them  to  the 
performance  of  this  duty."*  If  God  cannot  make  his 
people  pray,  it  is  wonderful  that  he  should  bind  himself 
not  to  do  the  best  he  can  for  the  salvation  of  others,  for 
which  he  is  so  anxious,  until  his  backward  people  have 
permitted  him.  If  he  cannot  control  them,  it  would  seem 
wise  for  him  to  act  without  their  prayers,  and  not  suspend 
the  salvation  of  his  creatures,  and  even  his  own  benevo- 
lent agency,  on  the  will  of  his  unmanageable  children, — 
whom  he  can  manage  to  keep  Christians,  but  whom  he 
cannot  cause  to  pray  aright. 

But  whether  it  is  allowed  or  not  that  by  all  sorts  of 
influence  God  does  the  best  he  can  for  each  individual  ; 
it  is  easy  to  see  that,  so  far  as  providence  is  concerned,  less  is 

*  658. 


DR  fitch's  theory.  35 

actually  done  for  one  than  for  another.  Some  are  heathen  : 
some  are  brought  up  in  ignorance  in  a  Christian  land ; 
some  cannot  read ;  some  are  blind  ;  some  are  deaf  and 
dumb  ;  some  die  young.  But  it  ought  not  to  be  overlooked 
that  these  providential  diversities,  especially  as  they  relate 
to  a  Gospel  land,  do  not  distinguish  the  elect  froin  the  non- 
elect.  Among  those  most  favoured  with  light,  many  appear 
to  perish  in  their  sins ;  and  from  among  the  ignorant  and 
neglected,  many  rise  up  to  the  Christian  character.  These 
then  are  not  the  decisive  influences  to  be  taken  into 
account  in  determining  vi^hether  God  does  more  for  the 
elect  than  for  the  non-elect.  The  question  is,  does  he  do 
more  by  his  Spirit  ? 

This  question  Dr.  F  studiously^  avoids  answering, 
though  pressed  by  Dr  Tyler.  "  That  writer,  [Dr  Tyler,] 
inquires,  Who  made  Peter  and  Judas  to  differ  ?  We  sup- 
pose that  question,  in  the  mouth  of  Paul,  was  applied  to  a 
totally  different  subject  from  salvation. — Who  distinguish- 
eth  thee  with  gifts  1  But  v»ere  we  to  apply  it  to  the  sub- 
ject of  salvation,  the  question  as  used  by  Paul  would 
mean,  Who  saved  Peter  ?  not.  Who  kept  Judas  in  his  im- 
penitence ?  Who  saved  Peter  1  God,  who  interposed  and 
induced  him  to  repent :  [not,  controlled  him  by  motives, 
but,  applied  motives  which  he  foresaw  Peter  would  allow 
to  prevail.]  But  did  he  not  interpose  for  Judas  without 
success  ?  We  know  not  how  far  he  may  have  gone  in  that 
particular  instance ;  but  we  know  that  he  goes  far  in  favour- 
ing salvation  in  the  case  of  many  who  perish,  and  charges 
on  them  the  very  guilt  of  refusing  his  grace  and  hardening 
their  hearts.     But  says  that  writer,  [Dr  Tyler,]  If  God  did 


36  DR  riTCH's  THEORY. 

as  much  to  effect  the  salvation  of  the  one  as  the  other,  how 
can  it  be  said  that  Peter  was  elected  in  distinction  from 
Judas?  [Now  he  will  speak  out.]  Did  as  much  for  Judas 
as  for  Peter  in  the  whole  work  of  his  salvation  ?  Is  that 
the  meaning  ?  But  we  have  never  said  that,  or  any  thing 
which  implies  it.  Did  as  much  for  Judas  as  he  did  for 
Peter  at  the  time  he  repented  ?  Is  that  the  meaning  ? 
[Now  surely  he  will  speak  out.]  We  have  not  asserted 
even  that.  We  have  said  that  what  God  did  for  the  repent- 
ance of  Peter  was  effectual  and  converting  grace ;  [because 
Peter  made  it  effectual  and  converting  ;]  and  what  he  did 
for  Judas  was  ineffectual  and  resisted  grace ;  [because 
Judas  made  it  ineffectual  by  resistance ;]  and  that  what 
he  did  for  both,  was  all  that  he  in  wisdom  could  do  toward 
the  object  of  securing  their  repentance  and  interest  in  sal- 
vation. In  purposing  to  do  this,  we  say  in  intelligible  lan- 
guage, that  he  elected  Peter ;  and  that  the  election  was 
founded,  not  in  mere  will  and  volition,  but  in  a  wise  regard 
to  the  highest  good  he  could  effect  in  his  kingdom. — 
Whether  he  did  as  much  for  both  or  not,  he  resolved  to  do 
the  best  he  could,  and  as  a  consequence  elected  Peter. 
But  how,  [Dr  Tyler  asks,]  was  Peter  elected  in  distinction 
from  Judas  ?  Why,  Peter  was  elected  and  Judas  was  not. 
What  other  distinction  would  you  have  ?  Perhaps  how- 
ever Dr  Tyler  refers  to  the  will  of  God.  [And  pray,  to 
what  else  could  he  refer?]  The  question  would  then  read 
thus  :  Can  God  will  to  save  Peter  in  any  sense  in  which  he 
does  not  will  to  save  Judas,  if  he  prefers  that  both  should 
repent  rather  than  perish,  and  does  all  that  he  can  for  the 
object  ?     Very  well :  if  that  is  the  meaning  we  are  glad  to 


DR  fitch's  theory.  37 

come  up  to  the  question."*  Well,  what  does  he  do  ?  In- 
stead of  answering  the  question  directly  in  a  single  sentence, 
he  proceeds  to  erect  a  guide  board,  and  to  write  on  it  the 
words  in  2  Pet.  3.  9,  and  Rom.  9.  18 ;  and  then,  for  a  full 
page  and  a  half,  is  calling  upon  all  passengers  to  examine 
the  guide  board.  All  that  I  can  gather  from  his  explana- 
tion is,  that  the  distinction  between  Peter  and  Judas  was 
not  grounded  "  on  simple  will  and  wont  in  God  ;"  "  that 
God  really  preferred, — with  his  whole  heart,  that  Judas 
should"  "repent  rather  than  neglect  repentance  and 
perish ;"  that  "  he  will  go  forward  with  the  measures  of 
his  own  choice  among  his  creatures,  rescuing  with  his 
mercy,  [how,  he  does  not  say,]  and  leaving  to  hardness 
whom  he  will ;"  and  that  "  he  will  take  this  course  because 
he  cannot  possibly  take  a  better. "f  And  this  is  the  ex- 
plicit answer  to  Dr  Tyler's  question,  "  Hoio  was  Peter 
elected  in  distinction  from  Judas  ?"  The  simple  answer 
should  have  been,  that  God  foresaw  that  if  he  created 
Peter  and  Judas  and  placed  them  under  such  circumstan- 
ces, Peter,  by  the  self-determining  power,  would  accept  the 
invitation  and  Judas  would  reject  it;  and  the  decision  to 
place  them  in  such  circumstances,  with  such  a  foresight  of 
the  event,  was  itself  the  election  of  the  one  and  the  rejec- 
tion of  the  other.  And  whether  the  Spirit  did  more  for  one 
than  the  other,  he  ought  not  to  have  been  pressed  to  say; 
for  really  he  did  not  know  :  he  could  not  know  and  should 
have  said  so.  If  any  thing  less  than  an  effectual  control  of 
the  will  was  done  for  Peter,  who  can  prove  from  the  mere 
continuance  of  Judas  in  sin,  that  less  was  done  for  him  ? 

'  655.        1 656,  7. 
4 


^  DR  fitch's  theory. 

And  surely  the  Scriptures  could  not  be  expected  to  make 
a  minute  distinction  between  two  invitations  both  of  which 
were  susceptible  of  rejection.  But  if  the  Scriptures  do  make 
a  distinction  between  this  part  of  the  treatment  of  Peter 
and  of  Judas,  it  only  proves  that  the  work  upon  Peter  was 
efficient,  and  that  Dr  F's  explanation  of  regeneration  and 
election  is  wrong.  And  yet  in  this  very  passage  he  him- 
self makes  the  supposition  of  different  degrees  of  influence. 
"  If"  God  "  places  his  creatures  in  those  conditions  and 
under  that  influence  which,  while  they  favour  the  salvation 
of  all  in  different  degrees,  will  on  the  whole  secure  the 
greatest  number  possible  for  him,  &c."*  I  conclude  how- 
ever that  the  supposition  is,  of  different  degrees  of  provi- 
dential influence.  It  is  to  this  influence,  I  suppose,  that 
Dr  F  must  refer  when  he  talks  of  its  limitation  by  a 
regard  to  the  public  good.  "  If  to  secure  the  obedience 
of  Satan  and  the  repentance  of  Judas,  would  involve  a 
departure  from  that  use  of  influence  which  on  the  whole  is 
best,  iS>6C."t  "  There  is  full  ground  for  the  distinction 
between  the  preference  of  God  as  to  what"  creatures  "  do, 
and  his  choice  as  to  what  he  shall  do  himself  in  order  to 
secure  their  obedience. "J  "  Nor  can  we  infer  at  all  from 
this  choice  of  his  heart"  respecting  the  salvation  of  Judas, 
"  that  God  could  go  any  further  on  his  part  than  he  did 
to  favour  the  repentance  of  Judas,  with  any  gain  to  the 
cause  of  redemption  on  the  whole,  or  at  least  with  any 
gain  to  obedience  in  his  whole  kingdom." ||  Allowing  it 
supposable  that  the  influence  of  providence,  to  be  the  best 
for  the  whole,  cannot  be  the  best  for  every  individual ;  yet 

*65G.        tG52,  Note.        t  G54.        ||G56. 


DR  fitch's  theory.  39 

if  sin  and  its  punishment  and  the  redemption  it  has 
occasioned,  have  not  led  to  as  much  good  as  lioliness  in 
its  stead  would  have  done,  then  the  good  of  the  universe 
cannot  be  impaired  by  the  highest  action  of  the  Spirit 
upon  a  Judas  that  is  consistent  with  his  moral  agency. 
If  there  is  no  advantage  to  be  gained  by  his  remaining  a 
sinner  rather  than  becoming  a  saint,  what  possible  injury 
can  be  done  to  any  or  to  all  by  the  strongest  efforts  of  the 
Spirit  upon  him  that  are  consistent  with  his  freedom  ?  If 
the  Spirit  were  not  omnipresent,  his  attention  to  Judas 
might  draw  his  attention  from  others,  and  so  diminish 
their  chance.  But  that  is  not  to  be  thought  of.  If  the 
Spirit  foresaw  that  he  could  not  succeed  with  Judas,  and 
that  stronger  attempts  would  only  make  him  worse,  tlicn  hi 
did  the  best  he  could  for  Judas.  To  say  that  the  Spirit 
did  the  best  for  Judas  that  he  could  consistently  with  the 
interests  of  holiness  at  large,  and  yet  not  the  best  he  could 
absolutely,  is  certainly  to  say  nothing,  so  long  as  you  as- 
sume that  it  is  better  for  the  universe  for  each  individual 
to  be  holy  than  sinful,  and  so  long  as  no  conceivable  injury 
to  others  could  result  from  the  highest  efforts  of  the 
Spirit  upon  Judas.  If  God  really  desired  the  holiness  of 
Judas,  all  things  considered,  what  public  interest  then 
could  possibly  restrain  him  from  using  with  him  the  utmost 
energies  of  the  Spirit  that  the  laws  of  moral  agency  would 
allow?  Who  could  possibly  be  injured  by  the  strongest 
effort,  (I  may  say  unlimitedly,)  that  God  could  make?  for 
any  destruction  of  his  moral  agency,  as  it  would  have  pre- 
vented the  possibility  of  his  holiness,  could  not  have  been 
an  effort  to  make  him  holy.     Look  at  the  thing  on  every 


40  DR  fitch's  theory. 

:side.  If  the  holiness  of  Judas  was  better  for  the  universe 
than  his  sin,  and  God,  all  things  considered,  did  most 
heartily  desire  it,  then,  whatever  hindrances  might  lie  in 
the  way  of  his  providential  influences  over  him,  no  injury 
could  arise  from  the  Spirit's  doing  all  he  could  to  make 
him  holy ;  and  he  would  be  sure  to  do  all  that. 

Shall  I  now  tell  you  why  Dr  F  is  so  reluctant  to  say 
whether  the  Spirit  did  as  much  for  Judas  as  for  Peter? 
Upon  his  principles  it  may  be  fairly  doubted  whether  he 
did.  I  have  already  said  that  if  the  Spirit  foresaw  that 
he  could  not  succeed  with  Judas,  and  that  stronger  at- 
tempts would  only  make  him  worse,  then  he  did  the  best 
he  could  for  Judas.  This  will  unriddle  the  whole  mys- 
tery. If  God  foresaw  that  a  greater  effort  upon  Peter 
would,  tlxrough  the  self-determining  power,  prevail,  and 
that  a  greater  effort  upon  Judas  would  only  make  him 
worse ;  then,  though  by  his  Spirit  he  did  all  he  could  to 
any  purpose  for  both,  yet  it  may  be  presumed  that  he  was 
encouraged  to  do,  and  -actually  did,  more  for  Peter  than 
for  Judas :  though  upon  this  principle  it  must  be  con- 
fessed that  he  should  not  have  shed  upon  Judas  a  ray  of 
light.  But  this  goes  upon  the  supposition  that  by  no  ex- 
ertion of  power  could  he  regenerate  Judas.  And  this  is 
denymg,  not  only  efficiency,  but  the  absolute  control  of 
motives.  And  then  no  one  will  pretend  that  any  thing 
turned  the  heart  of  Peter  but  the  self-determining  power. 

And  if  there  is  no  divine  efficiency  and  no  control  by 
motives,  how  comes  Dr  F  to  say  of  our  first  parents, 
"  They  had  ability  to  obey,  and  the  opportunity  of  con- 
firming their  o\vn  holiness  through  the  trial,  and  of  bless- 


DR  fitch's  theory.  41 

mg  their  posterity ;"  that  is,  of  confirming  their  posterity  ?* 
If  God  has  no  absolute  power  to  keep  his  creatures  from 
sin,  our  first  parents  and  their  posterity  could  not  have 
been  confirmed  by  his  power.  By  whose  then  ?  Angels 
were  confirmed,  says  Dr  F,  by  the  destruction  of  their 
brethren  and  by  the  wonders  of  redemption.!  By  what 
new  means  would  Adam,  after  a  few  years,  have  been  con- 
firmed to  eternity  ?  The  apostacy  of  his  posterity  is  ac- 
counted for,  by  a  writer  in  the  Christian  Spectator,  by  the 
feebleness  of  their  intellect  and  the  cravings  of  their  appe- 
tites in  infancy.  The  creation  of  male  and  female  in 
Eden  shows  that  it  was  the  purpose  of  God  to  bring  them 
into  existence  in  the  present  manner  had  Adam  stood. 
And  what  but  divine  efficiency  could  have  kept  a  race  of 
ignorant  infants  from  being  led  away  by  their  appetites  as 
at  present  ?  In  short,  what  could  have  confirmed  Adam, 
and  all  his  race  ushered  in  this  manner  into  existence, 
without  either  efl!icient  power  or  the  absolute  dominion  of 
motives? 

Dr  Fitch  says  of  Dr  Fisk,  "  He  asserts  that  we  found 
our  explanations  of  foreordination  on  principles  which — he 
claims  to  be  Arminian.  In  regard  to  the  proper  name  to 
be  given  to  these  principles,  we  shall  inquire  afterwards. "| 
And  yet  I  do  not  perceive  that  he  fulfilled  this  promise. 
And  at  the  close  of  the  Article  he  takes  leave  of  us  in 
these  words :  "  Ascribe  it  to  whatever  name  you  please : 
no  matter;  it  is  intelligible  and  everlasting  truth:"  evi- 
dently betraying  a  consciousness  that  it  was  the  Arminiau- 
ism  charged  upon  him. 

*  635.  t  C38.  X  619,  Note. 

4* 


CHAPTER    11. 


Or  Taylor's  Theory  as  exhibited  in  the  Christian  Spectator  for  1829. 

Dr  T  every  where  denies  divine  efficiency,  and  limits 
the  agency  of  the  Spirit  to  the  mere  presentation  of  motives. 
Of  course  he  must  have  the  same  views  of  predesti- 
nation and  election,  (both  of  which  he  strenuously  main- 
tains,) that  Dr  Fitch  has  expressed.  Dr  T  holds  that 
God  can  create  a  being  constitutionally  qualified  to  act 
without  being  acted  upon ;  that  the  angels  are  indepen- 
dent for  holiness  ;  that  man  would  need  no  divine  interposi- 
tion but  for  his  obstinate  depravity ;  that  this  renders  neces- 
sary a  more  urgent  pressure  of  motives  by  the  Spirit,  to  draw 
his  attention  from  the  world  and  fix  it  upon  divine  truth  ;* 

*  Dr  T  has  exactly  revived  the  old  Arminian  doctrine,  that 
the  chief  obstruction  caused  by  bad  affections  lies  in  their  drawing 
away  the  attention  from  divine  truth ;  and  that  nothing  is  neces- 
sary on  the  part  of  God  but  to  illumine  the  understanding  by  his 
Spirit.  Dr  Whitby  says,  (see  Introduction,)  "  Be  it  then  so  that 
we  naturally  have  an  aversion  to  the  truths  proposed  in  the  Gos- 
pel ;  that  only  can  make  us  indisposed  to  attend  to  them. — It  there- 
fore can  be  only  requisite — that  tlie  good  Spirit  should  so  illumine 
our  understandings,  that  we,  attending  to  and  considering  what  lies 
before  us,  should  apprehend  and  be  convinced  of  our  duty." 
Nothing  could  more  exactly  express  the  views  of  Dr  T. 


44     '^  DR  Taylor's  theory. 

that  the  Spirit  can  effectually  arrest  the  attention  of  sin- 
ners at  first,  but  it  depends  on  them  whether  that  attention 
shall  continue  or  return  to  the  world  ;  that  there  is  in  man 
a  constitutional  susceptibility  to  the  good  exhibited  in 
divine  truth,  founded  in  self-love  or  the  desire  of  happiness ; 
that  consequently  there  is  in  the  close  consideration  of 
truth  a  tendency  to  excite  the  love  of  truth ;  that  as  the 
Spirit  does  nothing  but  fix  the  attention  upon  truths  most 
calculated  to  persuade,  consideration  only  acts  in  a  line 
with  the  Spirit,  and  has  the  same  tendency  in  the  moment 
of  conversion  as  before  ;  that  consideration  produces  feel- 
ing and  feeling  consideration,  while  the  Spirit,  by  the 
clear  presentation  of  truth,  promotes  both ;  that  without 
this  consideration  God  cannot  regenerate,  for  rival  objects 
must  be  compared  before  God  can  be  preferred  to  the 
world ;  that  by  these  means  are  excited  supreme  desires 
after  God,  not  viewed  in  the  glories  of  his  character,  but  as 
the  mere  deliverer  from  punishment ;  that  these  desires 
are  not  selfish,  because  the  supreme  affection  is  detached 
from  the  world  and  fixed  on  deliverance  from  future  pu- 
nishment ;  that  selfishness  is  thus  suspended,  and  becomes 
weaker  in  every  renewal  of  its  power,  until,  just  at  the 
moment  of  conversion,  it  ceases  altogether ;  that  the 
means  of  regeneration  are  this  consideration  and  the  ac- 
companying efforts  to  love  ;  that  the  sinner  cannot  be  said 
to  use  the  means  of  regeneration  while  he  is  selfish,  and 
never  therefore  till  that  last  moment  when  he  makes  the 
full  and  final  effort  to  give  his  heart  to  God ;  that  when 
he  has  got  so  far  as  to  desire  deliverance  from  punishment 
more  than  the  world,  (here  is  an  infinite  chasm  in  the 


DR  Taylor's  theory.  45 

chain,)  he  is  exactly  prepared  to  give  his  supreme  affection 
to  God  as  soon  as  the  vail  which  conceals  the  divine  glory 
is  taken  away ;  that  he  himself  penetrates  this  vail  by  con- 
centrated attention,  and  then,  by  summoning  all  his  pow- 
ers to  love,  by  one  successful  effort  he  rises  up  to  divine 
affection. 

In  consistency  with  these  views,  Dr  T's  grand  object 
is  to  put  sinners  upon  exertion,  not  merely  by  urging  their 
obligations,  but  by  telling  them  that  they  may  succeed 
and  can  succeed,  and  that  God  may  be  ready  to  regene- 
rate them  at  once.  This  is  all  consistent  with  the  plan. 
For  as  the  exertions  which  the  Spirit  merely  prompts,  and 
which  are  actually  successful,  are  made  by  themselves, 
and  will  succeed  the  sooner  the  sooner  made ;  and  as 
moral  agents  may  reasonably  be  exhorted  to  these  efforts, 
and  are  put  upon  them  by  such  excitements ;  it  comports 
with  the  system  to  hold  out  these  encouragements.  And 
if  there  is  no  divine  efficiency,  there  is  nothing  false  or 
dangerous  in  all  this.  But  if  there  is  divine  efficiency, 
all  language  which  contradicts  it  encourages  a  fatal  self- 
dependence,  which  may  feed  a  false  religion  but  cannot 
promote  the  true. 

Dr  T  strongly  holds  to  the  doctrine  of  perseve- 
rance. 

Now  for  the  proof  of  all  this.  Dr  T  mentions  ap- 
provingly "  the  reason  commonly  assigned  for  the  neces- 
sity of  a  divine  influence  in  regeneration. — This  reason  is 
not  that  truth  and  motives,  viewed  in  relation  to  the  moral 
agency  of  man,  are  insufficient  to  produce  a  change  of 
heart,  but  that  when  presented  to  the  mind  of  the  sinner, 
their  influence  is  counteracted  by  the  perverseness  of  the 


46  DR  Taylor's  theory. 

heart."*  In  the  published  correspondence  between  Dr 
Hawes  and  Dr  T,  Dr  H  says,  "  The  sinner's  dependence, 
— if  I  rightly  understand  your  statement  of  it,  is  a  depen- 
dence of  Ids  own  creating,  growing  out  of  voluntary  per- 
verscness  of  heart."  Dr  T  replies :  "  The  necessity  of 
the  influence  of  the  holy  Spirit  in  regeneration,  results 
solely  from  the  voluntary  perverseness  of  the  sinner's 
heart."  The  necessity  that  God  should  conquer  the  rebel, 
doubtless  is  of  the  sinner's  own  creating;  but  here  his  very 
dependence  for  holiness  is  made  his  own  fault.  It  follows 
that  the  angels  are  not  dependent  for  holiness :  and  there 
is  the  self-deiermining  power.  In  this  same  letter  to  Dr 
H,  Dr  T  impliedly  asserts  what  Dr  Fitch  so  openly 
mamtains,  that  God  could  not  have  prevented  sin ;  a  point 
never  admitted  by  any  who  believe  either  in  divine  efficien- 
cy or  in  the  absolute  dominion  of  motives.  For  if  God 
can  control  one  mind  he  can  control  all,  and  then  he  could 
have  prevented  sin.  The  passage  is  this.  "I  do  not 
believe  that  sin  can  be  proved  to  be  the  necessary  means 
of  the  greatest  good,  and  that  as  such  God  prefers  it  on  the 
whole  to  holiness  in  its  stead. — But  I  do  believe  that  holi- 
ness as  the  means  of  good  may  be  better  than  sin  ;  that  it 
may  be  true  that  God,  all  things  considered,  prefers  holi- 
ness to  sin  in  all  instances  in  which  the  latter  takes  place, 
and  therefore  sincerely  desires  that  all  men  should  come  to 
repentance,  [but  cannot  make  them  repent;]  though  for 
wise  reasons  he  permits,  or  does  not  prevent,  the  existence 
of  sin."  Permits  sin !  And  how  could  he  prevent  it  ? 
In  no  way  but  by  refusing  to  create  moral  agents.     As  well 

*224. 


DR  Taylor's  theory.  47 

might  you  talk  of  my  permitting  the  cholera,  because  I  do 
not  kill  off  every  body  that  could  have  it.  Why  dress  up 
palpable  Arminianism  in  such  Calvinistic  drapery?  Why 
say  in  this  very  letter,  "  That  the  eternal  purposes  of  God 
extend  to  all  actual  events,  sin  not  excepted,  or  that  God 
foreordains  whatsoever  comes  to  pass ;"  vi^hen  the  mean- 
ing, as  Dr  Fitch  fully  explains  it  is,  that  God  decreed  all 
the  foreseen  actions  of  men  in  the  very  resolution  to  give 
them  being  under  such  circumstances  and  means  ?  Why 
should  one  who  has  publicly  renounced  divine  efficiency, 
the  very  ground  work  of  Calvinism,  stand  in  the  midst  of 
Calvinists  and  say,  as  in  this  same  letter,  "  I  could  wish 
that"  "  my  views  and  opinions"  "  might  be  satisfactory  to  all 
our  orthodox  brethren.  I  have  no  doubt  that  they  will  be  to 
very  many,  and  to  some  who  have  been  alarmed  hy  ground- 
less rumours  concerning  my  unsoundness  in  the  faith"  ? 
How  can  he  say,  "  With  respect — to  what  is  properly  con- 
sidered the  orthodox  or  Calvinistic  system, — as  opposed 
to — the  Pelagian  and  Arminian  systems,  I  suppose  there 
is  between  the  orthodox  ministry  and  myself  an  entire 
agreement"  ?  It  is  impossible  for  Dr  T  to  mean  more 
by  election  thaa  Dr  Fitch  does,  (for  both  equally  deny 
God's  absolute  dominion  over  the  mind  ;)  and  yet  he  ex- 
presses it  in  this  letter  in  the  following  high  Calvinistic 
language :  "I  believe — that  all  who  are  renewed  by  the 
holy  Spirit,  are  elected  or  chosen  of  God  from  eternity 
that  they  should  be  holy ;  not  on  account  of  foreseen  faith 
or  good  works,  but  according  to  the  good  pleasure  of  his 
will."  "  I  do  believe — that  when"  "  the  grace  of  God" 
"  becomes  effectual  to  conversion,  as  it  infallibly  does  in 


48  DR  Taylor's  theory. 

the  case  of  all  the  elect,  it  is  unresisted."  How  "  infalli- 
hly  does"  1  Because  all  who  yield  to  the  motives  present- 
ed do  yield,  and  God  foresaw  they  would.  When  this  is 
all  he  can  mean  after  denying  both  divine  efficiency  and 
the  dominion  of  motives,  why  should  he  say,  "  I  believe 
— that  the  renewing  grace  of  God  is  special,  in  distinction 
from  that  which  is  common  and  is  resisted  by  the  sinful 
mind,  inasmuch  as  it  is  that  which  is  designed  to  secure, 
and  does  infallilily  secure,  the  conversion  of  the  sinner"  ? 
That  is,  in  these  foreseen  instances  in  which  the  self-de- 
termining power  yields  to  motives,  God  ensures  conver- 
sion by  merely  presenting  the  motives.  The  doctrine  of 
perseverance  he  fully  sustains  in  this  same  letter.  "  I  be- 
lieve— that  all  who  are  renewed  by  the  holy  Spirit,  will, 
through  his  continued  influence,  persevere  in  holiness  to 
the  end." 

Dr  T  says,  "  How  does  the  Spirit  secure  this  change? 
I  answer,  not  by  acting  on  the  truth. — But  how  positively  1 — 
The  question — sets  philosophy  at  defiance."  "  That  the 
change  is  through  the  truth  and  implies  attention  to  the 
truth, — the  sober,  solemn  consideration  of  the  objects 
which  truth  discloses,  prior  to  the  requisite  act  of  the  will 
or  heart,  will  not  be  doubted  by  the  reader  of  the  sacred 
volume."*  "  God,  in  what  he  does  to  restore  the  sinner  to 
holiness,  obliges  him  to  be  conscious  of  the  requisite  pro- 
cess of  thought  and  feeling,  whether  he  will  or  not.  Tlie 
sinner  can  indeed  resist  and  arrest  this  progress  of  thoitght 
and  feeling,  but  cannot  prevent  its  commencement. "f 
"  What  is  the  tendency  of  divine  truth  to  turn  the  sinner 

*  Christian  Spectator  for  1820,  p.  17.  t  232. 


DR  Taylor's  theory.  49 

to  holiness,  if  there  be  nothing  in  the  nature  of  his  mind 
which  renders  him  susceptible  to  the  influence  of  truth  ? 
The  question  then  still  recurs,  how  has  truth  this  ten- 
dency? We  answer,  by  its  solemn  appeals  of  life  and 
death  to  the  principle  of  selWove,  or  the  natural  desire  of 
men  for  happiness. — Man  can  never  become  insensible  to 
happiness,  nor  to  the  truth  that  he  sacrifices  his  own  well 
being  as  a  self-destroyer.  This  truth,  as  it  is  presented  to 
the  mind  hy  the  testimony  of  God, — embodies  the  swn  total 
of  all  the  moral  influence  tvhich  God  uses  in  his  revela- 
tion."* Nothing  but  self-interest  to  be  considered  !  no 
disinterested  regard  to  God  or  man-!  "  Every  act — of 
sober  consideration  employed  on  the  great  truth  that  our  su- 
preme good  is  to  be  found  only  in  the  service  of  God,  when 
dictated  exclusively  by  self-love,  implies,  for  the  time  be- 
ing, the  suspended  influence  of  the  selfish  principle. 
[How,  unless  selfishness  consists  exclusively  in  the  love  of 
the  world  ?]  Such  suspension  however  does  not  neces- 
sarily prevent  the  thoughts  and  desires  of  the  mind  from 
recurring,  as  it  were  instantly,  to  the  objects  of  selfish 
affection,  nor  the  affection  itself  from  resuming  instantly 
its  accustomed  activity  and  power.  Indeed  the  tendency 
to  this,  from  the  previous  habitudes  of  the  mind,  is  direct 
and  powerful.  It  is  however  to  be  remembered  that — 
there  are  tendencies  opposite  to  that  specified ;  the  ten- 
dency of  excited  self-love  to  sober  consideration,  and  of 
this  to  deepen  such  excitement.  When  these  tendencies 
are  not  successfully  counteracted  by  opposing  tendencies ; 
when  by  the  strivings  of  the  Spirit  they  are  perpetuated 

*  226. 
5 


50  DR  Taylor's  theory. 

and  increased ;  then  it  is  that  the  selfish  principle,  not 
only  suffers  temporary  suspension,  [selfishness  suspended 
before  God  is  loved  !]  but  grows  weaker  and  weaker  in 
each  instance  of  its  returning  activity  and  dominion,  until, 
at  some  point  before  the  heart  fixes  on  God,  the  power 
and  influence  of  this  principle  wholly  cease  from  the  mind. 
[Selfishness  is  dead  and  God  not  yet  loved!] — Connected 
with  this  suspension  of  the  selfish  principle,  there  is  yet 
another  state  of  mind  involved  in  the  process  we  are  con- 
sidering, which  demands  attention  ;  viz.  the  truly  sincere 
desires  of  the  sinner  for  acceptance  with  God. — We  do 
not  suppose  that  the  state  of  mind  of  which  we  now  speak 
respects  the  inherent  excellence  of  the  objects  of  holy  affec- 
tion.—What  we  intend  is,  that"  the  sinner  "desires  accep- 
tance with  God, — contemplated  simply  under  pne  relation, 
viz.  as  the  only  means  of  deliverance  from  punishment. 
Nor  is  this  a  selfish  state  of  mind,  [though  self-love  is  su- 
preme !]  but  rather  a  state  of  mind  which  is  necessarily 
involved  in  the  mental  process  of  turning  from  sin  to  holi- 
ness. The  supreme  affections  of  his  heart  being  detached 
from  the  world,  the  grand  obstacle  to  his  preferring  a  de- 
liverance from  punishment  to  the  only  object  that  can 
come  into  competition  with  it,  is  removed. — And  now, 
according  to  the  laws  of  voluntary  action,  nothing  is  want- 
ing to  lead  forth  the  heart  in  holy  affection  to  God,  but — 
clear,  just,  and  vivid  views  of  his  glories."  Those  "glories 
— are  yet  veiled. — Still  however — he  is  willing  to  fix,  and 
does  in  fact  fix,  the  eye  of  contemplation  on  the  object  of 
holy  affection,  and  does,  with  such  glimpses  of  his  glories 
as  he  may  obtain,  feel  their  attractions  and  summon  his 


DR  Taylor's  theorv.  51 

Iieart  to"  the  love  of  God.  "  We  now  ask,  is  there  no 
tendency  in  these  acts  and  states  of  the  sinner's  mind  to 
carry  the  soul  forth  to  God  in  holy  love  ? — a  tendency 
which,  if  wholly  uncounteracted,  would  flow  out  in  holy 
love  to  God."*  "We  do  not  say  that  the  contemplation 
will  result  in  holy  love ;  but  we  say  that  in  proportion  to  its 
intensity  and  the  vividness  of  its  perceptions,  it  will  make 
known  to  human  consciousness  a  tendency  to  produce  love, 
direct  and  powerful,  and  not  easily  resisted."!  "  These 
.acts  have  the  same  tendency  when  the  sinner  is  regene- 
rated by  the  holy  Spirit."|  "  When  self-love  prompts  the 
first  act  of  sober  consideration,  there  is  in  this  act  a  ten- 
dency to  augmented  feeling,  and — this  feeling  tends  to  fix 
contemplation,  and  this  again  to  deepen  feeling;  and — 
thus  by  mutual  action  and  reaction  of  thought  and  feeling, 
the  process,  were  there  no  effectual  counteracting  influ- 
ence, would  go  on  until  it  terminated  in  a  change  of  heart. 
— Such  acts  and  states  therefore  have  a  tendency  to  such 
a  result.  But  if  they  have  this  tendency  according  to  the 
constitution  of  man  as  amoral  agent,  and  would,  if  uncoun- 
teracted, be  followed  by  a  change  of  heart  without  grace, 
then  they  must  have  the  same  tendency  when  man  gives 
his  heart  to  God  through  grace. "§  "  Of  all  specific  vo- 
luntary action,  the  happiness  of  the  agent  in  some  form  is 
the  ultimate  cnd."\\ 

"  We  now  ask  what  acts  of  the  sinner  must  be  denoted 
by  the  phrase  using  the  means  of  regeneration  ?''  They 
are  "  acts  of  sober  consideration  and  thoughtfulness  which 
were   dictated   by  a  regard   to   his   own   well    being."^ 

"227—231.         t  203.         t  234.         §222,3.       ||  24.       11217. 


52  DR  Taylor's  theory. 

"  While  the  selfish  principle  continues  its  active  influence 
in  the  heart, — no  meditation  on  divine  truth  can  properly 
be  considered  as  a  using  of  these  means."*  "  Divine 
truth  is  never  in  fact  thus  used  by  the  sinner  until  the 
identical  moment  when  he  submits  to  God."t  There  is 
then,  after  all,  no  using  of  the  means  of  regeneration  till 
the  very  act  which  is  regeneration  itself 

This  is  on  the  whole  just  such  a  journey  as  I  should 
expect  a  supremely  selfish  man  and  totally  depraved  sinner 
would  make  in  his  own  strength  from  sin  to  holiness. 
Treading  selfishness  under  his  feet  with  a  heart  caring 
for  nothing  but  himself;  panting  with  "  truly  sincere  desires 
— for  acceptance  with  God"  while  blind  to  his  "excel- 
lence" and  caring  for  nothing  but  to  shield  himself  from 
punishment;  completely  detached  from  the  world,  and 
just  prepared  to  give  his  heart  to  God  as  soon  as  he  can 
obtain  "clear,  just,  and  vivid  views  of  his  glories,"  the 
precise  things  that  never  were  seen  but  by  holy  eyes ;  put 
upon  using  the  means  of  regeneration  when  the  act  can- 
not possibly  precede  regeneration  itself  If  this  is  the  road 
travelled  by  the  self-determining  power,  surely  "  the  way 
of  transgressors  is  hard."  I  should  hope  that  this  single 
attempt  might  discourage  the  nations  from  essaying  to  go 
in  this  new  path.  Surely  it  is  better  to  "  go  in  the  strength 
of  the  Lord  God  ;"  to  "  make  mention  of  his  "  righteous- 
ness, even  of"  his  "only." 

One  grand  object  which  Dr  T  is  aiming  at  is  to  im- 
prove the  manner  of  addressing  sinners.  "  We  think  the 
Gospel  is  not  now,  as  it  was  by  the  apostles,  brought  be- 

*  210.        t  Christian  Spectator  for  1830,.  p.  148. 


on,  Taylor's  theory.  53 

fore  the  human  mind  in  the  character  and  relations  of 
a  cause  icJdch  is  to  produce  an  immediate  effect. — Every 
sinner  may  become,  and  is  authorized  to  believe  that  he 
may  become,  a  Christian  on  the  spot. — No  one  performs 
his  duty  the  more  for  being  told  it  ougJtt  to  be  done,  while 
the  conviction  is  also  forced  on  the  mind  that  it  will  not  be 
done.  The  conviction  of  the  present  practicability  of  duty 
is  indispensable  to  the  present  performance  of  duty."* 
This  is  undoubtedly  true  of  muscular  efforts ;  but  whether 
the  sinner  is  more  likely  to  love  God  for  being  told  that  he 
can,  in  a  form  to  encourage  his  native  self-dependence,  is 
another  question.  He  ought  to  be  called  upon  to  repent 
immediately.  His  obligations  cannot  be  too  forcibly  press- 
ed. Every  excuse  should  be  wrested  from  him,  and  espe- 
cially the  plea  of  inability.  He  may  be  told  that  he  de- 
serves eternal  fire  for  delaying  a  moment.  And  after  he 
is  thus  brought  under  a  crushing  sense  of  his  obligations 
and  guilt,  instead  of  casting  him  upon  his  own  resources, 
I  have  always  found  it  most  expedient  to  cast  him  helpless 
upon  the  strength  and  mercy  of  God.  I  have  told  him. 
But  after  all  these  obligations  you  never  will  repent  unless 
God  breaks  that  stubborn  heart.  You  will  get  into  the 
fire  if  you  can :  you  certainly  will  if  God  is  not  stronger 
than  you.  There  is  no  hope  for  you  unless  God  conquers 
the  rebel  at  his  feet.  Such  an  exhibition  of  his  desperate 
wickedness  and  obstinacy,  is  the  best  means  to  make  him 
die  to  all  hope  from  himself, — to  bring  him  to  cast  himself 
dead  at  his  Maker's  feet, — to  die  that  he  may  be  made 
alive.    From  what  I  have  seen  in  past  revivals,  I  am  ready 

*  Christian  Spectator  for  1829,  p.  2,  3. 

5* 


54  DR  Taylor's  theory. 

to  say  of  this  method,  as  David  said  of  Gohath's  sword, 
"  There  is  none  hke  that;  give  it  me." 

In  a  pamphlet  under  the  signature  of  an  Edwardean, 
lately  published  in  Connecticut,  it  is  stated  of  Dr  T  ;  "  He 
says  in  substance  that  all  sin  consists  in  self-preference. — 
Consequently  sin  must  be  the  transgression  of  a  known 
law. — Consequently — infants,  as  they  are  incapable  of  this 
self-preference  or  transgression  of  a  known  law,  have  no 
moral  depravity,  and  as  they  are  '  born  destitute  of  holi- 
ness,' have  no  moral  character."* 


CHAPTER  III. 

JVotice  of  Two  other  Writers. 

Our  brethren  of  this  general  school  insist  on  putting 
into  natural  ability  a  power  which  works  without  divine 
efficiency.  One  of  them  says,  "  Surely  the  Dr  would  not 
suppose  that  men  have  natural  ability  to  love  God  unless 
they  are  naturally  able  to  change  their  temper.  Neither 
would  he  contend  that  the  mind  can  change  this  temper 
without  any  action  or  choice  of  its  own.  [A  volition  before 
every  volition,  and  so  one  before  the  first.] — It  may  be  said 
without  impiety  that  almighty  poiocr  can  no  more  affect  the 
actions  or  decisions  of  the  mind,  than — motives  can  influence 
matter. — There  is  no  way  to. change  the  character  of  the 
mind — but  by  motives." 

The  other  writer  is  the  reviewer  of  Dr  Sprague's  Lec- 
tures on  Revivals,  and  of  the  Letters  in  the  Appendix,  in 
the  Christian  Spectator  for  March  1833.  In  one  of  those 
Letters  I  had  attempted  to  explain,  not,  as  the  reviewer 
says,  "  the  nature  of  man's  inability,"  (not  a  word  of  that,) 
but  the  manner  in  which  men  who  had  acted  with  me  had 
stated  the  full  natural  ability  and  obligations  of  sinners. 
I  will  quote  the  passage.  "  We  have  shown  them  that 
their  obligations  rest  on  their  faculties,  and  are  as  reason- 
able and  as  complete  as  though  the  thing  required  was 


56  NOTICE  OF  TWO  OTHER  WRITERS. 

merely  to  tvalk  across  the  jioor ;  that  their  faculties  consti- 
tute a  natural  ability,  that  is,  a  full  power  to  love  and 
serve  God  if  their  hearts  were  well  disposed ;  [according  to 
the  common  expression,  Yoii  canif  i/ouwill;J  leaving  noth- 
ing in  the  way  but  a  bad  heart,  for  which  they  are  wholly 
to  blame  if  there  is  any  blame  in  the  universe ;  that  sin 
can  rest  no  where  but  in  the  heart,  and  that  if  you  drive 
it  beyond  the  heart  you  drive  it  out  of  existence ;  that 
tliey  alone  create  the  necessity  for  God  to  conquer  them, 
and  to  decide  whether  he  will  conquer  them  or  not ;  that 
it  is  an  everlasting  blot  on  creation  that  God  has  to  speak 
a  second  time  to  induce  creatures  to  love  him,  much  more 
that  he  has  to  constrain  them  by  his  conquering  power, 
»Soc."  That  if  was  intended  to  express  just  what  it  does 
in  the  common  phrase.  You  can  if  you  will ;  namely,  to 
throw  all  the  blame  upon  the  heart :  and  it  was  so  ex- 
plained. It  was  intended  to  wrest  from  the  sinner  the 
plea  of  inability,  by  telling  him  that  he  would  find  power 
enough  on  hand  as  soon  as  he  should  attempt  the  ^vork 
with  a  right  temper.  And  if  you  say,  this  right  temper  is 
the  very  tiling  to  be  accomplished  ;  no  matter:  this  form 
of  presenting  the  subject  is  calculated  to  bring  it  home  to 
the  sinner  that  nothing  is  in  the  way  but  that  for  which 
he  is  wholly  to  blame.  And  if  any  thing,  in  the  form  of 
motives,  can  tend  to  his  conviction  and  humiliation,  it 
must  be  this.  Lay  the  question  of  efficiency  aside  :  we 
both  hold  to  the  use  and  necessity  of  motives.  And  when 
motives  of  such  a  tendency  are  brought  forward,  let  it 
never  again  be  said,  in  proof  of  their .  inutility  and  non- 
sense, that  the  good  temper  is  the  very  thing  to  be  accom- 


NOTICE  OF  TWO  OTHER  WRITERS.  57 

plished,  and,  what  is  the  power  where  the  temper  is  wholly 
dependent  on  God  ?  This  is  constantly  said,  in  different 
forms,  by  our  brethren  of  this  school.  The  reviewer 
makes  my  definition  of  ability  to  amount  to  this,  "  You 
have  full  power  to  make  yourselves  new  hearts — if  they 
were  already  new."*  No  definition  of  power  will  satisfy 
them  but  that  which  excludes  divine  efficiency.  My  if, 
I  allow,  belonged  rather  to  familiar  than  to  philosophical 
language  :  but  the  whole  paragraph  expressed  the  highest 
natural  ability  that  ever  was  or  could  be  held  by  a  believer 
hi  divine  efficiency, — the  highest  that  ever  was  dreampt 
of  by  the  mass  of  New-England  divines.  And  yet  the 
reviewer,  full  indeed  of  courtesy  and  grace  of  style  and 
proofs  of  mind,  makes  his  appeal — but  hear  him.  "We 
cannot  in  this  connexion  pass  over  a  very  remarkable  pas- 
sage in  Dr  Griffin's  Letter,  App.  p.  159,  in  which  the  nature 
of  man's  inability  and  dependence  on  the  influences  of  the 
Spirit,  is  stated  in  a  manner  which  we  had  never  expected 
from  the  author  of  the  Park-street  Lectures.  '  Their, 
[sinners']  faculties  constitute  a  natural  ability,  that  is,  a 
full  power  to  love  and  serve  God  if  tJieir  hearts  were  well 
disposed.'  [Why  did  his  quotation  stop  there  ?]  Now  we 
ask,  is  this  the  '  natural  ability'  of  New-England  divines  ? 
Is  it  on  the  ground  of  possessing  such  power  merely,  that 
sinners  have  been  exhorted  to  give  God  their  hearts  at 
once,  have  been  told  that  they  were  able  to  do  it  and  were 
utterly  inexcusable  for  a  moment's  delay  ? — This  statement 
of  Dr  Griffin  is  followed  by  another,  which  brings  him,  as 
far  as  we  can  see,  directly  on  the  ground  of  Evangelical 

*38. 


58  NOTICE  OF  TWO  OTHER  WRITERS. 

Arminians.  '  They,  [sinners,]  are  bound  to  go  forth  to 
their  work  at  once,  hut  they  are  not  hound  to  go  alone  : 
it  is  their  privilege  and  duty  to  cast  tliemselves  instantly 
on  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  not  to  take  a  single  step  in  their 
own  strength.'  App.  p.  161.  Now  it  is  not  possible,  we 
apprehend,  to  invent  any  statement  more  directly  contra- 
dictory than  this  to  the  fundamental  principle  of  New- 
England  Calvinism.  That  principle  is,  that  man  is  in 
himself  a  free  agent,  [and  who  said  he  was  not  ?]  and  not 
made  such  by  the  influence  of  the  Spirit;  that  he  is  bound 
as  a  free-agent  to  go  forth  at  once  to  the  work  of  obeying 
God,  in  the  exercise  of  power  conferred  in  creation  and 
not  superinduced  by  grace,  that  is,  to  go  alone  ;  that,  as 
a  complete  moral  agent  in  himself  considered,  he  is  bound 
to  obey  God  in  his  oion  strength,  this  being  made  in  the 
law  the  very  measure  of  his  obedience. — Upon  all  these 
points  Dr  Griffin  has  explicitly  contradicted  his  brethren 
and  taken  sides  with  their  opposers."  In  a  note  he  intro- 
duces the  younger  Edwards  as  saying  that  a  man  can  re- 
move his  moral  inability,  and  has  "  power  to  the  contrary 
act  in  every  instance  of  choice,"  and  can  choose  in  oppo- 
sition to  what  at  present  is  the  greatest  apparent  good.* 
This  is  only  saying  that  a  sinner,  while  he  hates  and  while 
sin  appears  the  most  attractive,  has  power  to  love.  Now 
if  you  mean  by  power  a  full  and  proper  basis  of  obligation, 
I  shall  be  the  last  to  deny  that ;  for  otherwise  the  sinner 
could  not  be  bound  or  blamed  or  punished.  But  if  you 
mean  by  power  an  ability  that  works  without  divine  effici- 
ency, I  hope  I  shall  be  the  last  to  believe  that.     And  I 

*  37—40. 


NOTICE  OF  TWO  OTHER  WRITERS.  59 

know  that  the  younger  Edwards  held  to  no  such  thing. 
He  was  my  preceptor  in  theology,  and  he  taught  a  very 
different  system.  And  every  body  knows  that  the  mass  of 
New-England  divines  from  the  beginning  have  acknow- 
ledged no  such  doctrine. 

There  is  no  difference  between  me  and  the  reviewer 
about  natural  ability,  except  that  I  place  it  in  the 
faculties  of  a  mind  dependent  on  God  for  holiness, 
and  he  places  it  in  faculties  that  move  themselves  to 
holy  action  without  divine  efficiency.  And  with  this 
essential  departure  from  the  track  of  New-England  divines, 
lie  makes  this  daring  appeal  to  them  against  their  own 
known  doctrines  and  dialect.  I  should  not  have  noticed 
this  in  a  writer  with  a  manner  in  all  other  respects  worthy 
of  imitation,  had  I  not  observed  the  same  thing  in  many 
instances  of  late.  It  is  a  common  practice  with  writers  of 
this  school  to  make  confident  appeals  to  Edwards  and 
Smalley  and  Dwight  and  the  New-England  divines  at 
large  as  their  coadjutors,  when  they  are  as  far  from  these 
divines  as  Arminianism  is  from  Calvinism.  Is  this  fair? 
is  this  honest  ?  It  may  serve  a  purpose,  but  is  it  right  I 
It  is  far  from  my  heart  to  wish  to  cast  any  reflections,  but 
as  an  humble  individual  I  do  entreat  that  this  practice 
may  be  discontinued.  Let  there  be  no  wrapping  up  of 
errour  under  orthodox  terms.  Let  none  be  afraid  or 
ashamed  to  speak  out  on  either  side.  There  is  a  radical 
division  in  our  churches,  and  let  it  appear.  Concealment, 
for  the  sake  of  holding  together,  will  only  corrupt  the 
whole  mass.  Whatever  it  costs,  let  every  man  speak  the 
truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  leave  the  event  with  God. 


60  NOTICE  OF  TWO  OTHER  WRITERS. 

In  regard  to  going  alone,  my  opinion  is,  that  every  un- 
regenerate  man,  without  the  least  delay,  ought  to  cast 
himself  upon  the  strength  of  God,  like  an  infant  falling 
into  its  mother's  arms,  and  to  go  on  in  holiness  from  that 
moment,  saying  as  he  goes,  "  My  soul,  wait  thou  only 
upon  God,  for  my  expectation  is  from  him."  Is  this  lan- 
guage new  to  the  land  of  the  Pilgrims  ?  It  has  been  in  it 
as  long  as  the  voice  of  prayer.  Is  it  a  late  thing  in  New- 
England  to  caution  men  against  depending  on  their  own 
strength  ?  It  has  been  the  common  dialect  from  the  days 
of  Cotton  and  Hooker.  It  must  be  the  dialect  of  all  who 
believe  in  divine  efficiency.  But  this  language  is  no 
denial  of  natural  ability,  as  consisting  in  faculties  which 
are  the  proper  basis  of  obligation.  When  we  speak  of 
casting  ourselves  on  the  strength  of  God,  we  do  not  mean 
in  order  to  help  out  our  natural  ability,  but  to  obtain 
moral  power.  Have  not  good  men  in  all  ages  cast  them- 
selves on  God  for  moral  strength  ?  How  was  it  in  the 
days  of  David  and  Isaiah  ?  "  It  is  God  that  girdeth  me 
with  strength  and  maketh  my  way  perfect."  "  Wait  on 
the  Lord,  be  of  good  courage,  and  he  shall  strengthen  thy 
heart :  wait,  I  say,  on  the  Lord."  "  My  strength  and  my 
heart  faileth ;  but  God  is  the  strength  of  my  heart  and  my 
portion  forever."  "Blessed  is  the  man  whose  strength  is 
in  thee."  "  Surely,  (shall  one  say,)  in  the  Lord  have  I 
righteousness  and  strength."  "  The  Lord  is  my  strength 
and  song,  and  is  become  my  salvation."  "  Trust  ye  in 
the  Lord  forever,  for  in  the  Lord  Jehovah  is  everlasting 
strength."  And  do  not  Christians  cast  themselves  on  God 
for  moral  strength  every  time  they  pray  for  sanctification  ? 


Notice  of  tavo  other  writers.  61 

And  if  it  is  the  duty  of  Christians  thus  to  cast  them- 
selves on  the  strength  of  God,  it  is  the  duty  of  sinners ; 
and  to  this  they  ought  to  be  exhorted.  No  believer  in 
divine  efficiency  will  hesitate  to  utter  this  injunction.  And 
if  you  suppress  it,  you  send  them  forth  crippled  with  self- 
dependence,  and  with  a  religion  very  different  from  the 
true.  And  then  you  may  talk  about  preaching  up  depen- 
dence occasionally  but  not  too  often  ;  you  may  talk  about 
differing  from  your  brethren  only  on  "  the  philosophy  of 
religion  ;"  (all  this  may  serve  a  purpose  ;)  but  in  fact  you 
and  they  stand  at  the  two  poles  on  one  of  the  two  or  three 
most  important  points  that  can  be  disowned  without  infi- 
delity itself 

We  admit  that  men  have  a  capacity  or  power  to  love 
God  without  the  application  of  divine  efficiency  ;  other- 
wise none  could  be  punished.  But  they  never  will :  and 
it  is  not  owing  to  their  depravity;  for  the  same  is 
true  of  the  holy  angels.  Now  if  you  ask  me,  what 
is  that  power  which  is  never  exerted  without  divine 
efficiency  ?  I  can  only  say,  that,  in  the  account  of  the 
divine  mind,  it  is  the  proper  basis  of  obligation,  and  there- 
fore, by  the  decision  of  common  sense,  must  be  called  a 
power.  Your  difficulty  is  to  see  that  a  creature  may  be 
reasonably  bound  while  dependent  for  his  affections.  We 
think  that  God  has  pronounced  the  compatibility  of  the 
two  by  pronouncing  the  truth  of  both.  And  while  we  thus 
believe,  we  cannot  admit  your  competency  to  decide  against 
the  power  on  account  of  the  dependence. 

6 


CHAPTER   IV. 

Meaning  and  Origin  of  Corrupt  Nature. 

As  I  am  reasoning  with  brethren  who  believe  in  the  ex- 
ercise system,  I  do  not  intend  to  embarrass  my  argument 
by  connecting  it  with  the  taste  scheme.  And  to  remove 
prejudices  on  account  of  any  leaning  I  may  be  supposed  to 
have  to  that  plan,  as  well  as  to  explain  my  meaning  when 
I  refer,  as  I  shall  have  occasion  to  do,  to  the  necessity  of  a 
new  temper  or  new  affections,  (without  determining  which,) 
before  the  sinner  will  be  persuaded  by  divine  truth  ;  I  will, 
in  the  outset,  state  what  I  mean  by  a  moral  nature  or  tem- 
per ;  what  I  mean  also  by  the  corrupt  nature  common  to 
the  race,  and  in  what  sense  it  has  been  derived  from  Adam. 
What  I  shall  say  on  these  subjects,  and  on  the  origin  of 
sin,  will  not,  I  think,  be  denied  by  any  who  believe  that 
God  efficiently  produces  holiness  but  not  sin. 

Self-love  consists  in  the  desire  of  happiness  and  aversion 
to  misery,  or  in  loving  to  gratify  our  personal  tastes  and  feel- 
ings. This  is  essential  to  a  rational  and  even  to  a  sensi- 
tive nature.  This  had  Adam  before  the  fall ;  but  divine 
efficiency  wrought  in  him  supreme  love  to  God,  which  kept 
self-love  in  due  subjection.  As  soon  as  God  withdrew  his 
sanctifying  influence,  (and  that  he  did  sovereignly  and  not 
as  a  punishment,)  Adam's  self-love  became  supreme,  (there 
can  be  no  rivals  for  supreme  affection  but  God  and  self,) 
and  of  course  turned  to  selfishness,  and,  as  soon  as  God 


64  MEANING  AND  ORIGIN 

was  presented  in  his  law,  to  "  enmity  against  God."     For 
all  this  no  positive  act  was  necessary  on  the  part  of  God 
but  to  uphold  Adam's  rational  existence.     If  Adam  does 
not  love  his  Maker  supremely,  he  must  with  supreme  desire 
seek  the  means  of  his  own  personal  gratification,  or  cease  to 
have  a  rational  soul.     Now  that  proncness  to  gratify  him- 
self, growing  out  of  the  absence  of  love  to  God  and  the 
presence  of  self-love  turned  to  selfishness  ;  or  perhaps  I 
may  more  properly  say,  that  combination  of  inward  ciraim- 
stauces  out  of  which  will  infallibly  arise  the  exercises  of 
selfishness  and  enmity  against  God,  constitutes  the  corrupt 
nature  or  temper  of  which  I  speak.     While  his  rational 
existence  is  continued,  and  while  he  does  not  love  God,  it 
must  be  his  nature  to  be  selfish,  and  to  hate  God  when  God 
sets  himself  against  him  in  his  law,  as  much  as  it  is  the 
nature  of  the  serpent  to  bite  and  of  the  lion  to  be  carnivo- 
rous.    The  difference  between  the  two  cases  is  this.    The 
nature  of  the  serpent  and  lion  depends  on  their  physical 
formation ;  the  nature  of  Adam,  on  the  absence  of  love  to 
God  which  he  ought  to  exercise.     He  is  to  blame  for  that 
state  of  things, — for  that  nature  or  aptitude, — and  there- 
fore it  is  a  moral  nature.*     If  one  must  love  his  own  hap- 
piness in  case  he  is  even  sentient,  then  a  man  who  does 
not  love  God,  must,  anterior  in  the  order  of  nature  to  his 
selfishness,  have  an  infallible  aptitude  to  selfishness.     If 

"  I  know  that  the  word  nature,  etymologically  considered,  be- 
longs exclusively  to  physics  ;  but  for  want  of  another  term,  and 
prompted  by  a  strong  analogy,  men  have  applied  it  to  our  moral 
constitution.  And  while  it  means  this,  to  say  that  a  change  of 
nature  must  he  a.  physical  change,  is  only  a  play  upon  words  which 
involves  a  serious  errour. 


"    OP  CORRUPT  NATURE.  65 

the  soul  7mist  have  desires  after  something  or  cease  to  be, 
and  must  be  influenced  by  the  greatest  apparent  good, 
then  a  man  who  loves  himself  supremely  and  God  not 
at  all,  must  have  a  preparation  within  him,  (consisting 
perhaps  in  the  mere  relation  of  things,)  to  hate  God  when 
God  comes  to  be  seen  arrayed  against  him  in  his  law. 

When  God  re-produced  supreme  and  habitual  love  to 
himself  in  Adam's  heart,  that  nature  or  aptitude  was 
changed.  It  was  not  the  new  nature  of  Adam  to  seek  his 
own  interest  supremely  and  to  hate  God.  Whether  God 
re-produced  any  thing  but  exercises,  I  will  not  say.  If  not, 
the  new  nature  was  not  a  new  existence,  but  a  new  relation 
between  the  feelings  towards  self  and  towards  God.  That 
is,  self-love  no  longer  ruled,  and  the  feelings  towards  God 
were  no  longer  hatred  but  supreme  love.  It  is  the  com- 
mon feeling  of  mankind,  until  philosophy  calls  the  thing  in 
question,  that  there  is  a  temper  which  is  the  foundation 
of  exercises.  I  see  a  man,  in  a  revival  of  religion,  dissol- 
ved in  tears  and  tenderness.  I  tell  you.  Go  to  that  man 
six  months  hence  and  contradict  him,  and  he  will  affront 
you.  Why  ?  you  ask  ;  he  has  no  such  feelings  in  exercise 
now.  No,  I  say,  but  such  is  his  nature.  We  account  for 
the  feelings  and  passions  of  men  by  charging  them  to  a  mild 
or  an  irascible  temper.  No  one  attempts  to  tell  what  it  is, 
any  more  than  he  attempts  to  account  for  the  mental  diver- 
sities of  different  animals,  (mere  organized  matter  cannot 
think  or  desire,)  or  for  the  preparation  in  the  sleeping  child 
to  love  its  parent  rather  than  a  stranger.  I  know  not  that 
a  man  actually  loves  himself  all  the  time  ;  and  yet,  sleeping 
or  waking,  it  may  constantly  be  said  of  him,  that  self-love 
6* 


66  MEANING  AND  ORIGIN 

is  inseparable  from  his  nature.  The  thing,  whatever  it  is, 
presents  itself  to  us  in  different  aspects ;  sometimes  as  a 
proneness  or  propensity,  sometimes  as  that  facility  of  ac- 
tion, founded  on  association  of  ideas,  which  we  call  habit, 
sometimes  as  a  mental  appetite  to  which  motives  are  to  be 
addressed,  as  an  invitation  to  a  feast  is  addressed  to  a 
bodily  taste.  In  the  last  case  I  know  not  but  the  motives 
are  presented  to  the  mind  predisposed  by  habitual  affec- 
tions. One  feeling  certainly  hurries  a  man  into  another. 
Anger  or  envy  will  cause  him  to  hate.  Offer  one  who 
loves  gold,  a  bag  of  guineas  to  cross  the  street,  and  if  no 
stronger  motive  urges  the  other  way  he  will  certainly 
come.  A  man  who  loves  honour,  will  be  induced  to  de- 
sire, to  be  grateful,  to  love,  to  resent,  to  be  angry,  to  be 
sorry,  to  be  glad,  according  to  the  relation  of  events  to  his 
ruling  passion.  A  man  who  loves  the  world  supremely, 
will  flee  from  a  religious  meeting  to  wordly  business.  Ex- 
perience shows  that  the  affections  and  volitions  do  mo\'e  in 
such  an  order,  and  hold  on  in  an  unbroken  course,  and 
we  are  not  conscious  of  any  thing  behind  them.  Pres. 
Edwards*  calls  the  thing  in  question  a  principle.  "  If 
grace  be — an  entirely  new  kind  of  principle,  then  the  ex- 
ercises of  it  are  also  entirely  a  new  kind  of  exercises. — 
This  new  spiritual  sense,  and  the  new  dispositions  that  at- 
tend it,  are  no  new  faculties,  but  are  new  principles  of 
nature.  I  use  the  word  principles  for  want  of  a  word  of  a 
more  determinate  signification.  By  a  principle  of  nature 
in  this  place  I  mean  \\\Vii  foundation  which  is  laid  in  nature, 

*Quoted  in  a  Tract  entitled,  The  Renewal  of  Sinners  the  Work 
of  Divine  Power ;  p.  9. 


OF  CORRUPT    NATURE.  67 

either  old  or  new,  for  any  particular  manner  or  kind  of  ex- 
ercise of  the  faculties  of  the  soul,  or  a  natural  habit  or 
foundation  for  action ; — so  that  to  exert  the  faculties  in  that 
kind  of  exercises  may  be  said  to  be  his  nature.^'  This 
definition  exactly  accords  with  the  one  which  I  have  given 
unless  it  makes  nature  more  decidedly  an  existence,  and 
as  such  the  foundation  of  exercises.  But  when  he  calls  it 
a  habit,  and  makes  it  consist  in  statedly  exerting  the  facul- 
ties in  a  particular  way,  no  one  can  object.  He  seems  at 
a  loss  for  a  definition,  but  on  the  whole  accords  very  well 
with  the  one  which  I  have  given.  That  definition  is,  that 
nature,  in  the  unregenerate,  is  an  aptitude  to  every  selfish 
exercise,  growing  out  of  the  fact  that  self-love,  which  is 
inseparable  from  their  existence,  has,  from  the  absence  of 
love  to  God,  become  supreme  ;  and  in  the  Christian,  that 
it  is  an  aptitude  to  every  holy  feeling,  arising  from  the  do- 
minant love  of  God. 

The  constitution  made  with  Adam  was,  that  if  he  con- 
tinued obedient  his  posterity  should  be  jjrcserved  holy  ;  that 
if  he  transgressed  they  should  be  abandoned  to  sin.  In 
consequence  of  the  fall  they  come  into  the  world  without 
the  sanctifying  influence  of  God  upon  their  hearts.  The 
consequence  is,  that  they  are  left  under  the  dominion  of 
selfishness.  How  soon  they  have  selfish  exercises,  I  can- 
not tell.  That  from  the  first  they  prefer  pleasure  to  pain, 
and  therefore  have  self-love  and  only  self-love,  is  certain ; 
but  whether  it  is  selfishness  in  exercise,  when  they  have 
no  knowledge  to  direct  their  affection  to  another  object,  or 
to  institute  any  comparison,  I  will  not  determine.  But 
with   that  self-love  which  will   develope   itself  in   time, 


68  MEANING  AND  ORIGIN 

and  without  any  influence  which  can  ever  awaken  the  love 
of  God  in  their  hearts,  they  have  a  preparation  within  them 
for  every  thing  wicked.  That  preparation  is  what  I  mean 
by  their  corrupt  nature.  And  it  stands  in  the  same  relation 
to  the  moral  properties  which  will  mark  their  lives,  that  the 
carnivorous  nature  of  the  young  lion  does  to  his  future 
habit  of  eating  flesh. 

This  depravity,  in  whatever  it  consists,  subjects  infants 
to  condemnation.  Of  this,  natural  death  is  declared  to  be 
a  standing  proof  "As  by  one  man  sin  entered  into  the 
world,  and  death  hy  sin,  even  so  death  passed  upon  all 
men,  for  thai  all  have  sinned."*  In  the  same  chapter 
the  whole  race  are,  over  and  over  again,  said  to  be  con- 
demned for  Adam's  sin,  even  as  believers  are  justified 
for  Christ's  righteousness.  By  this  I  understand  that  the 
public  act  of  Adam,  which  indicated  what  their  hearts 
would  be  as  fully  as  it  showed  his  own,  was  made  the 
ground  of  their  public  condemnation.  But  this  public 
condemnation  would  not  have  been  pronounced  upon  them 
had  they  not  deserved  eternal  death  for  their  own  wicked 
hearts.  One  thing  is  certain.  If  they  are  saved  by  grace, 
they  might  have  gone  to  hell  by  justice.  They  cannot  go 
to  heaven  by  both.  If  I  lay  a  purse  of  gold  on  your  table, 
it  cannot  be  both  a  present  and  the  payment  of  a  debt. 
One  idea  excludes  the  other.  But  all  who  are  saved  are 
saved  by  grace  and  by  Christ.  To  this  we  must  adhere  or 
renounce  the  Bible.  Had  no  Saviour  been  provided,  (and 
surely  God  was  not  bound  by  justice  to  provide  a  Saviour,) 
the  whole  race  would  have  been  lost.     Nor  is  it  the  provi- 

*Rom.  5.  12. 


OP  CORRUPT  NATURE.  69 

sion  of  a  Saviour  that  has  brought  the  race  into  being  in 
an  infant  state.     The  creation  of  nialo  and  female  in  Eden, 
shows  that  it  was  the  purpose  of  God,  at  the  time  the  cove- 
nant was  made  with  Adam,  to  bring  them  into  the  world 
just  as  he  now  does,  whether  Adam  stood  or  fell,  and 
whether  a  Saviour  was  provided  or  not.     Justice  therefore 
approved  of  the  actual  destruction  of  a  whole  race  that 
were  to  be  born  infants.     They  meet  a  condemnation  at 
the  threshold  of  their  existence.     Their  just  doom  in  the 
cradle  is,  that  first  or  last  they  shall  sink  to  perdition.  And 
this  doom  would  have  been  just  had  no  Saviour  been  pro- 
vided.    Had  no  Saviour  been  provided  then,  what  privilege 
would  it  have  been  for  them  to  live  to  years  of  discretion 
rather  than  sink  to  hell  from  the  cradle  ?     It  would  only 
have  been  the   privilege   of  growing  up   under  judicial 
blindness,  to  treasure  up  wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath. 
If  you  deny  the  justice  of  bringing  them  into  the  world  in 
such  a  state,  why,  I  ask,  is  it  more  unjust  in  God  to  with- 
hold his  influence  the  first  moment  of  one's  existence,  than 
after  one  has  loved  him  with  all  the  heart  up  to  the  mo- 
ment of  the  withdrawment  ?  From  the  angels  who  fell  and 
fi-om  Adam,  he  withdrew  his  influence  for  no  previous 
fault,  but  after  they  had  loved  him  with  all  the  heart  up  to 
that  moment.     That  influence  he  owes  to  no  creature,  ex- 
cept where  he  has  promised  it,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Church 
and  the  elect  angels;  and  rational  creatures  are  complete 
moral  agents  without  it,  or  sinners  could  not  be  punished. 
And  if  God  can  justly  leave  infants  unsanctified  and  sinful, 
why  may  he  not  justly  treat  them  as  sinners.     Why  do  you 
bring  them  to  Christ  in  baptism,  if  they  have  no  need  of 


70  MEANING  AND  ORIGIN 

cleansing  and  of  a  Saviour,  and  therefore  of  mercy?  It  is 
not  infant  angels  that  are  to  be  brought  to  the  baptismal 
font.  A  large  part  of  the  race  die  in  infancy  and  go  to 
heaven  or  hell.  If  to  the  latter,  (which  for  certain  reasons 
I  hope  is  not  the  case,)  then  they  justly  perish;  if  to  the 
former,  then  they  are  saved  by  grace  and  by  Christ,  and 
therefore  might  justly  have  been  consigned  to  death. 

Now  whether  they  are  condemned  for  a  corrupt  nature 
or  for  sinful  exercises,  I  will  not  decide.  Nor  will  I  attempt 
to  weigh  the  difference  between  condemning  them  for  a 
nature  sure  to  rebel,  and  condemning  them  for  bad  exer- 
cises when  they  have  no  knowledge  of  God  or  of  duty. 
But  sure  I  am  that  they  are  not  without  a  moral  character 
till  they  are  old  enough  to  understand  God's  law.  Sure  I 
am  that  they  do  not  pass  in  one  moment,  (for  one  sin  de- 
serves eternal  death,)  from  the  neutral  state  of  the  lower 
animals  to  a  desert  of  everlasting  burnings. 

If  infants  cannot  be  sinners,  neither  can  they  be  sancti- 
fied. What  then  have  become  of  the  unnumbered  millions 
who  have  died  in  infancy?  Who  can  believe  that  the  in- 
fant Jesus  differed  in  nothing  from  the  infant  Judas  ?  But 
the  thing  is  settled  beyond  dispute.  To  Jeremiah  it  was 
said,  "  Before  thou  camest  forth  out  of  the  womb  I  sancti- 
fied thee."*  And  lest  this  should  be  accounted  a  mere 
consecration  to  the  prophetic  office,  I  will  bring  another. 
To  the  father  of  John  the  Baptist  it  was  said,  "  He  shall 
be  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost  even  from  his  mother's 
womb."t  And  if  you  say,  this  was  miraculous,  still  it 
shows  that  the  thing  was  possible.     And  if  it  is  possible  for 

*Jer.  1.5.  t  Luke  1.15. 


OF  CORRUPT  NATURE.  71 

the  sanctifying  Spirit  to  act  on  the  infant  mind,  it  is  possi- 
ble for  the  effects  of  his  absence  to  be  there.  And  what 
can  these  be  but  some  form  or  other  of  depravity  1  And 
if  it  is  possible  for  infants  to  be  depraved  and  to  be  sancti- 
fied, who,  on  account  of  any  difficulties  attending  the  sub- 
ject, will  deny  their  actual  depravity  and  sanctification,  in 
direct  opposition  to  the  plain  language  of  the  Bible  ? 


C  H  A  P  T  E  R  V  . 

Divine  Efficiency. 

As  I  am  dealing  with  the  adherents  of  the  exercise  sys- 
tem, I  shall  stand  on  that  ground  through  my  whole  argu- 
ment :  or  if  I  have  occasion  to  speak  of  the  previous  state 
of  mind  which  gives  effect  to  motives,  I  shall  call  it  temper 
or  affections.  For  the  same  reason  I  shall  adopt  their  lan- 
guage in  respect  to  the  divisions  of  the  mind.  These  I  be- 
lieve to  be  understanding,  will,  and  affections ;  but  to  ac- 
commodate myself  to  their  dialect,  I  shall  include  the  last 
two  under  the  common  name  of  will.  At  present  I  shall 
consider  the  controversy  as  existing  with  those  only  who 
hold  that  the  Spirit  does  as  much  for  one  as  another,  unless 
he  stops  short  with  some  on  account  of  the  foreseen  impos- 
sibility of  success.  For  reasons  already  stated  I  think  I 
am  authorized  to  consider  the  writers  in  the  Christian 
Spectator  as  of  this  class.  Indeed  between  this  theory  and 
that  of  an  absolute  control  by  motives,  there  can  be  no 
middle  ground,  at  least  none  which  any  text  of  Scripture 
can  be  pretended  to  support.  And  an  absolute  control  by 
motives  is  no  part  of  their  creed  who  deny,  or  even  doubt, 
that  God  could  have  prevented  sin.  But  the  grand  point  of 
difference  is  on  the  question  of  divine  efficiency.  This  they 

7 


74  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

firmly  deny,  and  this  we  as  decidedly  maintain.  And  we 
feel  that  where  the  most  spiritual  part  of  the  Church  since 
the  Reformation  have  gone, — the  Wattses,  the  Doddridges, 
the  Edwardses,  and  the  Brainerds,  there  it  is  safe  for  us  to 
go ;  and  that  a  new  track,  struck  out  in  opposition  to  all 
these,  is  marked  with  suspicion  and  danger.  Pres.  Ed- 
wards says,  "  Let"  the  sinner  "  apply  his  rational  powers 
to  the  contemplation  of  divine  things,  and  let  his  belief  be 
speculatively  correct;  still  he  is  in  such  a  state — that  those 
objects  of  contemplation  will  excite  no  holy  affections.^'* 
David  Brainerd,  in  his  account  of  his  conversion,  says, 
"  I  at  once  saw  that  all  my  contrivances  and  projects  to 
procure  deliverance  and  salvation  for  myself,  were  utterly 
in  vain.  I  was  brought  quite  to  a  stand,  as  finding  my- 
self utterly  lost.  I  saw  that  it  was  forever  impossible  for 
me  to  do  any  thing  towards  helping  or  delivering  myself  I 
saw  that,  let  me  have  done  what  I  would,  it  would  no  more 
have  tended  to  my  helping  myself  than  what  I  had  done. 
I  had  the  greatest  certainty  that  my  state  was  forever  mise- 
rable for  all  that  I  could  do,  and  wondered  that  I  had  never 
been  sensible  of  it  before."  "  It  was,"  adds  the  author  of 
the  Tract,  "  when  he  had  thus  given  up  all  expectation  of 
relief  from  his  own  efforts ;  when  he  was  brought  to  see 
himself  lost  and  helpless;  when  his  former  feelings  were 
gone  and  he  had  left  off  all  his  selfish  and  resolute  endea- 
vours to  bring  himself  into  a  better  state ;  it  was  then — 
that  unspeakable  divine  glory  seemed  to  open  to  the  view 
of  his  soul. "t  This  was  unlike  the  present  plan  of  throw- 
ing sinners  upon  their  own  resources. 

*  Tract  before  mentioned;  p.  10.  t  id.  p.  90. 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  75 

The  real  question  lies  between  the  Calvinistic  doctrine 
of  divine  efficiency  and  the  Arminian  self-determining 
power.  If  the  will  turns  without  the  immediate  agency  of 
God,  it  is  turned  none  the  less  by  a  self-determining  power 
for  the  contemplation  of  motives  which  do  not  absolutely 
control.  The  old  Arminians,  though  they  denied,  as  the 
writers  in  the  Christian  Spectator  do,  that  motives  exert- 
ed an  absolute  dominion,  and  some  of  them  talked,  incon- 
sistently enough,  about  the  necessity  of  indifference,  did 
not  deny  the  indispensableness  of  motives.  In  that  they 
would  have  bid  defiance  to  the  most  familiar  consciousness 
of  the  human  race.  But  they  meant  to  insist,  as  these  mo- 
dern writers  do,  that  the  will  is  not  a  slave  to  motives. 
If  without  divine  efficiency  the  will  turns  in  view  of 
motives  which  it  is  competent  to  resist,  it  is  turned  by  a 
self-determining  power.  If  all  that  God  does  is  to  lay  truth 
in  before  the  mind  in  its  most  affecting  aspects  and  rela- 
tions, then  it  is  not  God,  in  distinction  from  discovered 
truth,  that  changes  the  heart.  It  is  either  truth,  in  its  own 
affecting  aspects  and  relations,  which  does  the  work,  or 
the  mind  changes  itself  in  view  of  motives.  There  is  no 
escaping  from  this  dilemma.  Dr  Taylor  says,  the  mind  is 
never  changed  "without  an  influence  of  the  holy  Spirit 
distinct  from  the  natural  or  simple  injluencc  of  truth.^^ 
But  that  influence  of  the  Spirit  does  no  more  than  lay  in 
truth  before  the  mind,  not  in  false  glosses,  but  in  its  own 
affecting  aspects  and  relations.  If  the  influence  of  truth 
thus  made  conspicuous,  is  in  any  sense  "distinct  from"  its 
"  natural  or  simple  influence,"  yet  it  is  its  own  unborrowed 
influence  when  clearly  seen.     After  the  truth  is  thus  made 


76  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

manifest,  God  does  no  more.  Either  then  it  is  the  truth 
clearly  seen  which  changes  the  mind  by  effectual  control, 
or  the  mind  changes  itself  in  view  of  motives,  and  that  is 
the  self-determining  power.  The  former  the  gentlemen 
deny ;  the  latter  of  course  they  must  maintain.  No,  they 
say,  it  is  God  that  produces  the  change  by  an  instrument. 
He  sends  in  the  truth  as  a  man  thrusts  in  a  sword  ;  and  no 
one  would  ascribe  the  execution  to  the  sword,  but  to  the 
man  who  wields  it.  Then  the  action  is  on  the  truth,  and 
not  on  the  mind  othenvise  than  as  the  truth  affects  it.  But 
Dr  Taylor  denies  that  the  action  is  on  the  truth ;  and  I 
hope  to  show  in  another  place  that  there  is  no  sense  or 
meaning  in  such  a  supposition.  Further,  if  the  truth,  in 
one  instance,  is  the  instrument  in  the  same  sense  that  the 
sword  is  in  the  other,  then  the  mind  has  no  more  of  the 
freedom  pleaded  for  than  the  body  when  pierced  with  a 
sword.  The  freedom  set  up  consists  in  a  power  to  be  slain 
by  the  truth  or  to  repel  the  truth  at  pleasure ;  which  would 
exclude  every  external  agent  and  every  instrument  wielded 
by  him.  Were  a  man  to  present  a  sword  which  the  body 
could  receive  or  reject  at  pleasure,  and  it  chose  to  receive 
it  and  die,  and  gave  it  this  effect  after  the  agency  of  the 
man  had  ceased,  (after,  in  the  order  of  nature,)  the  man 
could  not  be  said  to  have  produced  that  death  even  by  an 
instrument.  But  to  avoid  all  dispute  about  the  meaning  of 
the  self-determining  power,  I  once  more  announce,  that 
when  I  use  the  phrase,  I  mean  no  more  than  a  power  that 
actually  turns  from  sin  to  God  without  divine  efficiency,  in 
view  of  motives  illumined  by  the  Spirit  but  not  absolutely 
controllino-. 


DIVINE   EFFICIENCY.  77 

Our  brethren  start  with  this  assumption,  that  they  can 
look  far  enough  into  the  mysteries  of  nature  to  see  deci- 
sively that  if  God  makes  me  "  willing"  in  the  day  of  his 
"  power,"   I   am  not  free  though  I  am  willing.     Now  I 
protest  against  this  assumption,  and  affirm  that  no  mortal 
man  can  look  far  enough  into  the  secrets  of  nature  to  see 
this  to  be  a  fact.     I  doubt  whether  Gabriel  could,  even  if 
it  were  a  fact.      I  protest  also  against  this  bold  scrutiniz- 
ing into  the  mode  of  divine  operation.      This  fault  is  not 
chargeable  upon  us.     "  God  said,  Let  there  be  light,  and 
there  was  light."     We  ask  no  questions  about  the  mode, 
and  are  satisfied  to  know  that  he  ivilled  it  to  be  and  it  was. 
*'  You  hath  he  quickened  who  were  dead  in  trespasses  and 
sins."      We  ask  no  questions  about  the  mode,  and  are  sa- 
tisfied to  know  that  he  willed  their  resurrection  and  it  took 
place.     We  are  not  of  those  who,  after  such  a  report,  com- 
plain of  a  "physical  change"  which  destroys  freedom. 
From  our  own  consciousness  we  know  that  we   are  free  ; 
and  the  man  who  has  been  regenerated  is  the  last  to  com- 
plain that  his  liberty  is  abridged.     Our  freedom  consists 
in  a  faculty  to  will  under  the  dictates  of  the  understand- 
ing, and  in  actual  willingness.      If  we  are  willing  we  are 
free.     No  higher  idea  of  freedom  can  be  conceived.      If 
it  is  possible  for  God  to  make  us  willing  by  a  direct  act 
upon  the  mind,  his  efficiency  must  be  consistent  with  our 
liberty.     This  dream  of  the  incompatibility  of  efficiency 
with  freedom,  is  one  of  those  errours  of  judgment  which 
grow  out  of  the  casual  association  of  ideas.     In  other  cases 
where  power  enforces  a  thing,  we  say,  the  subject  is  not 
free.      And  you  transfer  that  idea  to  a  case  where  power 


78  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

only  makes  us  willing.  If  I  am  willing,  I  know  you  can- 
not look  far  enough  into  the  secrets  of  nature  to  see  that 
I  am  not  free,  even  though  made  willing.  What  more  do 
I  want  ?  I  have  complete  faculties  and  a  willing  soul. 
But  you  say,  what  are  faculties  that  cannot  move  unless 
moved  by  another  ?  This  word  cannot  is  constantly  used 
delusively  in  these  discussions.  A  faculty  to  move  that, 
physically  speaking,  cannot  move,  is  a  contradiction  in 
terms.  It  is  a  faculty  which  is  not  a  faculty.  But  there 
may  be  faculties  to  move  which,  in  point  of  fact,  will  not 
move  in  such  a  manner  but  in  him  in  whom  they  have 
their  being.*  By  power,  as  applied  to  the  human  mind, 
we  mean  nothing  more  than  the  proper  basis  of  obligation  ; 
and  it  consists  in  the  faculties  of  a  rational  soul ;  faculties 
not  necessarily  independent  in  their  exercises.  Rational 
creatures  are  bound  to  love  God  even  though  he  does  not 
efficiently  make  them  willing  ;  else  the  wicked  could  not 
be  punished.  We  ascribe  to  them  therefore  a  power  irre- 
spectively of  the  action  of  God  upon  them  ;  because  it  is 
the  dictate  of  common  sense  that  no  one  can  be  bound  to 
to  do  a  thing  for  which  he  has  not  natural  ability,  for  in- 
stance, to  carry  that  mountain.  If  you  can  prove  from  this 
obligation  that  there  is  no  divine  efficiency,  prove  it.  But 
I  know  that  you  cannot  penetrate  far  enough  into  the  mys- 
teries of  nature  to  see  that  it  must  be  so.  You  must  refer 
the  decision  to  divine  revelation,  the  plain  tenour  of  which 
we  must  believe  whether  it  crosses  what  we  call  our  reason 
or  not.  And  all  revelation  is  against  you,  as  I  hope  to  show 
in  its  proper  place.     Assuming  this  at  present,  we  say  that 

*  Acts  17,  28. 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  79 

rational  creatures  have  a  capacity  to  love  God  without  his 
efficiency,  but  that,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  they  never  will. 
Nor  does  this  arise  from  their  perverseness  ;  for  we  apply 
the  same  assertion  to  the  holy  angels.  And  if  we  are 
charged  with  inconsistency  in  asserting  a  power,  (meaning 
only  a  basis  of  obligation,)  where  there  is  no  independence, 
we  take  shelter  in  the  utter  incapacity  of  man  to  decide 
this  question  by  his  own  unassisted  reason,  and  appeal 
confidently  to  the  word  of  God,  which  plainly  and  very 
often  asserts  what  we  affirm.  And  if  that  word  supports 
divine  efficiency  in  respect  to  man,  none  will  doubt  that 
it  is  true  in  respect  to  angels  :  for  those  who  make  our  de- 
pravity the  only  occasion  for  the  interposition  of  the  Spirit, 
and  thus  limit  his  operations  to  men,  deny  efficiency  alto- 
gether, and  make  that  interposition  a  mere  matter  of  moral 
suasion.  If  the  Bible  asserts  this  dependence  in  reference 
to  a  part,  it  does  in  reference  to  all.  On  that  word  we 
cast  ourselves.  To  the  plain  and  uncontradicted  meaning 
of  several  hundred  texts  we  submit,  whether  we  can  see 
the  consistency  of  what  they  assert  or  not.  This  we  must 
do  in  all  cases.  If  the  Bible  tells  us  that  there  are  Three 
in  One,  we  must  believe  though  we  cannot  comprehend. 
If  it  tells  us  that  men  and  angels  are  bound  to  love  God, 
and  so  have  power,  without  divine  efficiency  applied,  and 
at  the  same  time  informs  us  that  they  are  not  independent, 
we  must  believe  it  all  though  unable  to  reconcile  the  parts. 
If  God  is  not  to  be  believed  when  he  tells  us  of  those  facts, 
relative  to  matter  or  mind,  which  lie  too  deep  for  creature 
comprehension,  he  cannot  make  a  credible  revelation  of 
necessary  truths  ;  for  there  are  many  such  truths  whose 


80  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

modes  and  relations  we  cannot  comprehend.  We  cannot 
tell  how  our  will  moves  the  body,  how  the  grass  grows, 
nor  even,  according  to  Locke  and  Stewart,  how  motion  is 
communicated  by  impulse.  If  we  are  to  believe  nothing 
whose  modes  we  cannot  comprehend,  we  must  stand  uni- 
versal skeptics  in  the  midst  of  a  world  full  of  wonders,  and 
must  constantly  reject  the  testimony  of  our  senses.  If  it 
can  be  proved  from  the  Scriptures  that  God  did  hold  Judas 
bound  to  love  him,  to  whom  he  never  applied  his  efficient 
power,  and  that  he  did  apply  that  power  to  Peter,  we  must 
believe,  whatever  difficulties  lie  in  the  way,  that  Judas  had 
natural  power,  (meaning  by  power  the  basis  of  obligation,) 
and  that  Peter  was  made  to  differ  from  him  by  the  imme- 
mediate  operation  of  the  Spirit  upon  his  heart.  I  believe 
this  because  I  find  it  in  my  Bible :  and  while  it  is  there,  I 
will  lie  down  upon  it  and  hold  it  as  with  the  grasp  of  death, 
even  though  as  unable  to  understand  it  as  to  understand 
how  God  could  exist  without  a  beginning  or  a  cause. 

Why  should  liberty  be  impaired  by  divine  efficiency  1 
It  is  agreed  on  all  hands  that  the  Christian's  new  exercises 
are  his  own,  as  much  as  they  possibly  can  be  his  own. 
They  are  acts,  not  of  God,  but  of  his  own  mind,  as  fully  as 
they  can  be  acts  of  that  mind, — as  fully  as  God's  acts  are 
acts  of  his  mind.  God  never  created  his  own  mind,  nor, 
as  far  as  we  can  conceive,  his  own  exercises.  All  are  self- 
existent,  without  succession,  in  one  eternal  now,  insepara- 
ble from  his  self-existent  nature.  But  in  the  highest  pos- 
sible sense  he  exercises  the  feelings  he  has.  And  in  a 
sense  equally  perfect  the  Christian  exercises  his  feelings. 
They  are  the  real  exercises  of  his  own  mind.     Mind  is 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  81 

such  a  peculiar  substance  that  its  action  can  be  in  the 
highest  possible  sense  its  own  while  caused  by  the  Author 
of  its  being.  If  we  are  willing,  we  as  completely  exercise 
that  willingness  as  though  we  had  caused  it  by  an  inde- 
pendent power.  In  regard  to  its  being  our  own,  we  go  as 
far  as  our  brethren  possibly  can.  The  only  point  of  dif- 
ference is  about  the  cause  :  not  whether  it  is  entirely  our 
own,  but  what  caused  it  to  be  exercised.  Our  brethren, 
if  they  differ  from  us  in  any  thing  but  words,  must  mean 
that  the  mind  of  man  not  only  exercises  its  own  affections 
in  the  fullest  degree,  but  causes  itself  to  exercise  them.  If 
they  meant  only  that  the  faculties  cause  the  exercises,  there 
is  a  sense  in  which  this  is  true ;  for  the  essential  attributes 
of  mind  are  necessary  to  the  action  of  mind.  But  they 
seem  to  have  a  confused  notion  that  the  will,  not  only  exer- 
cises such  volitions,  but  chooses  to  exercise  them ;  placing 
a  volition  before  every  volition,  and  one  before  the  first ; 
the  very  absurdity  charged  upon  the  old  Arminians  by 
Pres.  Edwards.  The  question  is  not  whether  Peter  does 
himself  exercise  the  affections,  and  exercise  them  in  the 
highest  possible  sense  in  which  any  being  can ;  whether 
it  is  his  own  faculties  that  put  them  forth.  The  ques- 
tion is  not  whether  he  is  willing  in  the  highest  sense  in 
which  any  being  can  be  willing ;  whether  it  is  his  own 
hearty  willingness.  In  these  points  all  are  agreed.  But 
the  sole  question  is,  what  causes  him  to  exercise  such  a 
willingness  ?  One  says  it  is  God,  another  says  it  is  Peter. 
And  those  who  adopt  the  latter  opinion,  talk  about  his 
doing  it  spontaneously, — his  doing  it  because  he  chooses  to 
do  it,  as  if  there  needed  any  other  consent  than  the  wil- 


82  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

lingness  itself.  But  they  seem  to  dream  of  the  necessity 
of  a  willingness  to  be  willing  ;  which  again  carries  us  back 
to  that  confusion  which  Pres.  Edwards  encountered  and 
exposed  ;  namely,  the  necessity  of  a  volition  before  every 
free  volition,  and  therefore  one  before  the  first ;  else  the 
first  is  not  free ;  and  then,  as  slaves  cannot  beget  a  line  of 
freemen,  no  part  of  the  series  is  free.  If  you  say,  the 
mind  must  cause  the  volition,  there  is  a  sense  in  which 
this  is  true.  If  there  was  no  mind  there  could  be  no  voli- 
tion. It  is  the  mind  itself  that  wills.  But  the  question 
still  returns,  what  causes  the  mind  to  will  thus  and  thus 
rather  than  in  a  contrary  way?  If  you  say,  the  mind 
chooses  to  do  it,  there  again  is  a  volition  before  every  free 
volition,  and  one  before  the  first.  If  you  say,  the  mind 
has  power  to  act  in  view  of  motives,  I  know  it  well ;  and 
so  has  Judas  power  to  love,  but  he  does  not  exert  that 
power.  Why  does  Peter  exert  it?  If  you  say,  because 
he  chooses  to  do  it,  there  again  is  a  volition  before  every 
free  volition.  If  you  say,  the  cause  lies  in  the  self-deter- 
minmg  power,  the  question  still  returns,  why  does  Peter 
exert  that  power  and  Judas  not  ?  If  you  trace  it  to  a  pre- 
vious volition  in  Peter,  you  have  need  to  find  the  cause  of 
that,  and  to  run  back  interminably  through  a  chain  which 
at  last  leaves  an  effect  without  a  cause.  If  the  cause  of 
that  exertion  of  the  self-determining  power  is  not  a  previ- 
ous volition,  what  is  it?  A  capacity  to  choose?  But 
Judas  has  this  capacity  and  does  not  use  it :  why  does 
Peter  use  it  if  the  reason  is  not  a  previous  choice  ?  His 
capacity  cannot  be  the  cause  of  his  using  his  capacity  in 
this  way  ;    for  Judas  has  the  same  capacity  and  does  not 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  83 

SO  use  it.  What  self-determining  power  can  be  controlled 
by  capacity,  or  can  exist  in  capacity,  without  a  previous 
choice  ?  The  very  word  self-determination  implies  a  de- 
cision from  fixed  purpose  ;  and  this  cannot  be  made  by 
mere  power  or  capacity  without  an  act  of  the  will.  No 
man,  I  think,  can  conceive  of  a  self-determining  power 
which  proceeds  without  purpose  or  choice.  A  self-deterr 
mining  mind  is  a  mind  that  purposely  determines  its  own 
acts  :  and  there  is  a  purpose  before  every  purpose,  and  one 
before  the  first.  It  is  in  vain  to  ransack  the  mind  for  a 
self-determining  power  that  does  not  consist  in  a  capacity 
to  control  the  volitions  hy  previous  volitions.  If  you  mean 
by  the  self-determining  process,  that  we  choose  to  choose, 
say  it :  but  if  you  mean  any  other  thing,  you  must  mean 
only  that  the  mind  itself  wills ;  and  this  is  as  true  on  our 
plan  as  on  yours.  The  willingness  could  not  be  more  its 
own  if  it  carried  back  an  agency  beyond  its  own  action  to 
cause  its  own  activity.  This  language  exposes  the  confu- 
sion of  the  whole  system.  The  theory  of  self-determina- 
tion assumes  that  the  mind  sends  back  an  agency  to  cause 
its  own  activity, — that  it  acts  to  cause  its  own  action, — 
that  it  acts  before  it  acts, — that  its  action  causes  its  first 
action.  If  the  mind  originates  its  own  holy  action,  it 
either  acts  before  it  acts,  or,  without  acting,  it  originates 
its  action  by  a  mere  potoer  to  act.  Certainly  the  action 
grows  out  of  a  power  to  act ;  but  a  power  to  originate, 
without  acting,  is  quite  a  different  thing.  It  is  not  the 
mind's  power  to  act,  but  a  power,  without  acting,  to  cause 
itself  to  act. 

I  will  not  have  such  a  self-determining  power  in  my 


84  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

system,  you  say.  I  always  have  denied  it,  and  it  shall  not 
be  fastened  upon  me.  Well  then,  who  does  determine 
the  will  on  your  plan  ?  God  does  not  except  by  motives. 
Motives  have  no  absolute  control.  After  they  have  ex- 
erted all  their  force,  the  will  is  to  decide  whether  to  fall  in 
with  them  or  reject  them.  In  that  decision  it  is  not  influ- 
enced by  motives.  For  after  the  whole  body  of  motives 
have  done  their  best,  the  decision  is  to  be  made  whether 
to  allow  their  influence  to  have  any  effect.  Call  that  influ- 
ence ten  degrees.  It  must  be  no  more  nor  less.  The 
whole  body  of  motives  are  wrapt  up  in  ten  degrees,  and 
the  question  is,  shall  ten  degrees  be  rejected  or  be  allowed 
to  prevail  ?  That  precise  question  the  mind  must  decide 
without  the  influence  of  motives.  The  ten  degrees  are  not 
the  pleading  attorney,  but  the  prisoner  at  the  bar.  He 
stands  to  be  judged.  If  he  is  allowed  to  speak,  the  ten 
degrees  are  changed  to  eleven.  The  influence  of  motives 
is  not  working  on  the  judge ;  that  influence  is  the  very 
thing  to  be  judged.  It  Jias  spent  itself,  and  now  the  ques- 
tion is,  shall  that  identical  influence,  without  increase  or 
change,  be  lifted  up  or  cast  down  1  In  that  decision  the 
will  is  influenced  by  nothing  out  of  itself  It  is  its  own 
determiner.  Even  the  temper  and  aflfections  are  not  al- 
lovved  to  interfere.  The  very  thing  which  the  will  has  to 
do  is  to  crush  and  destroy  the  temper  and  affections.  Self- 
interest  is  not  allowed  to  speak.  The  whole  plea  which 
self-interest  has  put  in  is  mute  in  the  prisoner  at  the  bar. 
Not  a  straggling  motive  from  any  corner  of  the  universe 
is  left  out  of  the  ten  degrees.  Not  one  can  exert  an  influ- 
ence on  the  decision.     The  very  point  at  issue  is,  whether 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  85 

one  of  them  all  shall  have  the  least  influence  or  not.  In 
the  decision  of  that  question  the  mind  can  be  determined 
by  nothing  but  its  own  despotic  will.  And  if  this  is  not 
self-determination,  tell  me  what  is.  Besides,  here  is  a 
mind  claiming  to  be  rational,  and  highly  jealous  of  its  li- 
berty, that  constantly  acts,  in  the  highest  concerns,  without 
motives,  and  therefore  with  no  more  reason  than  a  block, 

Every  attempt  to  find  in  a  previous  act  of  the  mind 
the  cause  of  holiness,  leads  to  inconsistency.  Some  have 
placed  it  in  a  consent  to  fall  in  with  the  motives  contained 
in  divine  truth;  others,  (with  nearly  the  same  meaning,) 
in  a  resolution  to  submit  to  God.     Let  us  consider  both. 

The  mind  consents  to  fall  in  with  the  motives  presented 
in  divine  truth,  before  it  does  fall  in  with  them  and  put 
forth  holy  affections.  That  consent  cannot  be  holy,  for  it 
it  is  the  cause  of  holiness.  And  being  unholy,  it  cannot 
be  put  in  motion  by  holy  motives.  Such  motives  may  hv 
addressed  to  reason  and  conscience  ;  but  none  except  mo- 
tives adapted  to  a  selfish  temper  can  induce  that  unholy 
consent  which  produces  all  the  holiness  in  the  soul.  Mo- 
tives of  a  better  character  must  indeed  be  in  readiness  to 
be  fallen  in  with  when  the  mind  consents ;  but  that  con- 
sent, which  has  the  most  important  bearing  of  all  the  ope- 
rations of  the  mind,  sets  aside  as  useless,  (in  respect. to 
itself,)  all  the  holy  motives  of  the  universe,  and  yields  only 
to  those  which  are  unholy.  It  will  not  itself  submit  to  any 
but  bad  motives,  and  yet  it  compels  the  mind  to  yield  to 
all  those  which  are  contained  in  the  truths  of  God. 

Take  the  other  view.  The  advocates  of  the  new  doc- 
trine, in  their  division  of  the  mental  powers,  comprehend 
8 


80  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

die  heart  and  will  under  the  common  name  of  will :  and, 
overlooking  the  immense  difficulty  of  subduing  a  wicked 
Iteart,  they  speak  of  the  operation  as  being  as  easy  as  it  is 
to  will.  They  go  upon  the  principle  that  the  will,  (in  the 
vulgar  sense  of  the  word,  viz.  the  faculty  which  forms  re- 
solutions,) can  control  the  affections;  and  they  constantly 
beset  awakened  sinners  to  resolve  to  submit.  That  reso- 
lution they  consider  the  cause  of  all  the  holy  affections ;  of 
course  it  is  not  itself  holy  :  consequently  it  cannot  be  mov- 
ed by  motives  adapted  to  a  holy  temper.  Here  then  again 
there  is  no  chance  for  the  operation  of  any  but  selfish  mo- 
tives, to  awaken  that  lordly  resolution  which  commands  in- 
to existence  all  the  holy  affections.  None  but  bad  motives 
can  act  on  that  wicked  emperor  who  orders  the  mind  into 
submission  to  the  pure  motives  of  God.  He  is  moved 
huuself  by  the  worst  influence,  but  sends  out  the  best 
He  is  not  known  by  his  works ;  for  his  works  are  good  and 
he  is  evil. 

I  ask  the  advocates  of  the  exercise  system,  what  there 
li;  before  the  holy  affection  that  can  be  called  an  indepen- 
dent power;  I  mean,  that  originates  holy  exercises  with- 
out the  immediate  action  of  God.  How  does  it  work  ?  I 
ain  not  asking  what  power  exercises  the  affections ;  that  is 
the  mind  :  but  I  am  inquiring  after  a  power  which  ex- 
hausts its  influence  before  the  exercise  appears.  Is  this 
jjower  exerted  through  a  voluntary  act  or  is  it  not  ?  If  it  is, 
then  there  is  a  volition  before  every  volition,  and  one  be- 
fore the  first.  If  it  is  not,  then  I  ask,  what  is  that  mighty 
power  which  produces  these  wonderful  effects  without  any 
decision  or  action?     Look  at  this  thing  on  every  side. 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  87 

Look  at  it  long.  Pass  not  by  the  question  without  a  dis- 
tinct answer.  The  main  point  turns  on  this.  How  does 
the  mind  cause  its  own  exercises  without  any  act  or  deci^ 
sion  ?  What  independent  cause  can  act  there  without  an 
act  of  the  mind  ?  Look  at  it.  What  can  it  be  ?  When 
you  go  back  beyond  volition,  you  find,  nothing  but  mind 
in  an  involuntary  state  :  but  how  can  mind  in  such  a  state 
act  to  cause  volition  in  distinction  from  exercising  it  ?  The 
believers  in  a  disposition  might  think  they  saw  a  cause, 
though  not  an  independent  cause.  But  will  you  who  are 
so  strenuous  to  exclude  every  thing  from  the  mind  but  ex- 
ercise, say  that  you  have  found  in  it  an  independent  cause 
of  exercise  which  involves  no  decision  or  action  ?  In  a 
thing  which  has  nothing  but  exercise,  what  is  that  mighty 
cause  which  produces  every  thing  without  exercise  ?  Ex- 
isting affections,  by  entertaining  motives  which  call  forth 
similar  affections,  may  in  a  sense  be  the  cause  of  the  lat- 
ter ;  but  this  is  not  the  case  contended  for  by  the  advocates 
of  the  self-determining  power.  Besides,  there  are  here  no 
such  affections  as  you  wish  to  produce. 

You  say,  the  cause  lies  in  the  faculty  of  the  will.  Bui 
are  you  sure  that  this  is  not  using  words  without  a  meaning  ? 
What  is  the  faculty  which,  without  any  decision  or  act, 
causes  itself  to  will  1  Can  you  look  so  far  as  clearly  to  see 
that  there  is  any  thing  in  all  this  but  words  ?  Put  it 
in  plain  and  intelligible  language  and  tell  me  what  it  is. 
Get  not  over  this  task  by  covering  it  up  in  the  tapestry  of 
general  terras.  I  cannot  be  satisfied  till  this  question  is 
answered.  I  well  know  that  there  is  a  faculty,  and  that 
that  faculty  is  exercised  in  willing ;  but  when  the  faculty 


S8  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

has  willed,  it  has  done  all  that  we  can  trace  :  we  cannot 
find  in  it  an  independent  cause  of  that  exercise.  We  can 
find  in  it  a  sort  of  cause,  (as  without  the  faculty  the  exer- 
cise could  not  exist,)  but  by  no  means  an  independent 
cause.  By  the  faculty  of  the  will  we  understand  no  more 
tlian  that  the  mind  is  so  formed  that,  with  or  without  di- 
vine efficiency,  it  will  put  forth  volitions,  as  matter  cannot. 
But  whether  there  is  or  is  not  divine  efficiency,  is  not  de- 
cided by  the  allowed  existence  of  a  faculty. 

But  cannot  God,  you  say,  lodge  in  mind  an  efficient 
cause  as  well  as  in  matter  ?  If  you  mean  by  an  efficient 
cause  that  without  which  the  effect  could  not  be,  (the  com- 
mon definition  given  it,)  then  mind  is  an  efficient  cause ; 
for  without  mind  there  could  be  no  perception  or  thought 
01'  affection  or  volition,  or  any  operation  of  imagination  or 
memory.  But  if  you  mean  by  an  efficient  cause,  a  cause 
independent  for  its  present  power  and  action,  there  is  not 
an  efficient  cause  in  all  the  works  of  God.  I  am  willing 
to  admit  also  that  the  attributes  of  matter,  which  consti- 
tute the  laws  of  nature,  are  efficient  causes.  Stewart  con- 
siders the  laws  of  nature  as  only  the  stated  modes  of  divine 
operation,  and  denies  that  any  thing  intervenes  between 
the  divine  will  and  the  effect.  But  if  the  attributes  of 
matte}'  do  not  exist  separately  from  God,  matter  does  not 
exist ;  and  then  we  must  all  go  hack  to  Berkleianism. 
Stewart  denies  that  efficient  causes  can  exist  in  matter  : 
but  if  extension  exists  separately  from  God,  the  extension 
of  a  marble  rock  is  the  efficient  cause  of  its  filling  the 
space  to  the  exclusion  of  other  bodies.  Brown,  on  the 
other  hand,  maintains  that  the  laws  of  nature  are  efficient 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCV.  89 

causes,  but  denies  that  God  constantly  produces  their  ex- 
istence ;  and  says  that  at  the  creation  he  permanently 
lodged  in  matter  its  existence  and  powers,  which  continue 
without  his  further  interposition.  But  to  me  this  appears 
as  impossible  as  for  God  to  create  a  being  which  for  the 
future  shall  be  self-existent.  It  seems  to  suppose  that  he 
lodged  self-existence  in  matter  and  its  laws,  which  appears 
to  be  a  contradiction  even  in  terms.  In  the  middle  space 
between  these  two  philosophers  I  would  take  my  humble 
stand,  and  say,  that  the  attributes  or  laws  of  matter  are 
efficient  causes,  actually  intervening  between  the  divine 
will  and  the  effect,  but  that  they  are  momentarily  sup- 
ported and  made  what  they  are  by  the  power  of  God. 

Now  the  operations  of  these  laws  of  matter  are  uniform 
and  mechanical,  without  any  variations  or  diversities  to  be 
accounted  for.  In  this  they  essentially  differ  from  tbe 
operations  of  mind.  In  the  latter  the  diversities  are  the 
very  things  and  the  only  things  to  be  accounted  for.  That 
the  mind  is  the  efficient  cause,  in  general,  of  affections 
and  volitions,  does  not  account  for  the  fact  that  one  mind 
has  holy  exercises  and  another  sinful.  We  may  account 
for  the  sinful  by  the  existence  of  self-love,  (essential  to 
every  nature  above  a  block,)  turned  into  selfishness  by  the 
absence  of  love  to  God,  and  moved  by  motives  of  which 
the  universe  is  full ;  but  we  cannot  account  for  the  holy 
exercises  without  going  back  beyond  the  motives  in  view 
of  which  they  were  called  forth,  to  that  power  which 
caused  the  mind  to  fall  in  with  the  motives :  for  before 
holiness  is  implanted  in  the  heart,  there  is  nothing  an- 
swering to  self-love  in  the  other  case,  to  which  the  motives 


9U  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

are  adapted.  The  fact  is,  that  the  heart  governs  the  head 
more  than  the  head  the  heart.  The  heart,  influencing  the 
judgment  respecting  the  greatest  good,  controls,  in  moral 
matters,  the  opinions  of  the  understanding  ;  but  the  under- 
standing cannot  reform  a  selfish  heart. 

The  mind,  though  an  efficient  cause,  is  not  indepen- 
dent. And  what  do  you  mean  by  that?  you  say.  Sup- 
pose God  does  constantly  uphold  the  causal  powers  of  the 
mind,  as  he  does  the  causal  power  of  the  loadstone,  they 
are  still  causes  existing  separately  from  him,  as  much  as 
the  attributes  of  matter,  (the  true  physical  causes,)  exist 
separately  from  him.  All  this  is  true  ;  but  those  mental 
powers  are  only  what  we  mean  hy  faculties.  And  in  the 
e.xercise  of  the  faculties  there  is  a  latitude  altogether  dif- 
ferent from  the  mechanism  of  the  material  world.  No 
powers  or  faculties  are  causes  of  such  a  nature  as  to  ac- 
count for  the  difference  of  moral  feeling  between  Peter  and 
Judas.  Those  powers  act  uniformly  so  far  as  to  attend  to 
and  choose  the  greatest  apparent  good  ;  but  what  that  ap- 
parent good  is,  depends  less  on  the  faculties  than  on  the 
state  of  the  heart.  In  the  unregenerate,  where  supreme 
self-love  predominates,  the  greatest  apparent  good  is  sure 
to  be  wrapt  up  in  self-interest,  and  the  powers  which  God 
.supports  are  as  sure  to  act  under  the  general  control  of 
selfishness  :  and  as  no  light  spread  upon  other  objects  can 
make  them  dearer  to  the  selfish  man  than  self,  no  radiations 
of  trutli  can  alter  this  direction  of  the  powers,  until,  by  an 
energy  wholly  distinct  from  the  faculties  and  from  truth, 
the  stubborn  heart,  in  view  of  truth,  is  all  at  once  made  to 
transfer  its  supreme  affection  to  God. 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  91 

It  has  been  asked  on  our  side,  How  can  our  faculties 
be  constantly  dependent  and  their  operations  forever  inde- 
pendent ?  There  is  nothing  gained  by  anything  delusive 
or  by  concealing  any  part  of  the  truth.  I  admit  therefore 
that  the  argument  for  divine  efficiency  involved  in  this 
question  is  not  logical.  The  power  of  the  loadstone, 
though  constantly  supported  by  God,  is  its  own  power ; 
else  the  attributes  of  matter  have  no  existence  separate 
from  God,  and  then  matter  has  no  existence.  And  if  that 
attraction  is  its  own  power  separately  from  God,  it  is, 
though  not  an  independent,  yet  an  efficient  cause,  inter- 
vening between  the  divine  will  and  the  effect.  Can  that 
cause  be  dependent  and  its  action  independent  ?  Its  ac- 
tion, though  not  the  immediate  action  of  God,  is  certainly 
caused  by  God.  The  action  of  that  power  mechanically 
follows  from  the  support  of  that  power ;  and  if  the  power 
is  not  independent,  the  action  is  not  independent,  although 
the  action  is  its  own  and  not  God's.  Thus  it  is  with  the 
attributes  or  laws  of  matter  :  is  it  so  with  mind  ?  The 
faculties  of  the  mind  are  as  constantly  supported  as  the 
attributes  of  matter ;  and  the  exercise  of  a  faculty  is  not 
the  act  of  God  but  the  act  of  the  creature.  Its  support 
and  its  exercise  are  so  distinct  as  to  be  the  acts  of  entirely 
different  agents.  Thus  far  the  two  cases  are  alike.  But 
here  arises  the  mighty  difference  :  there  is  no  such  me- 
chanism in  the  operations  of  the  mental  faculty.  If  there 
was,  its  operation  must  be  the  same  at  all  times  and  in  all 
minds.  Its  support  makes  it  merely  a  faculty,  but  does 
not  decide  its  operations.  These  are  decided  by  the 
state  of  the  heart  and  outward  circumstances, — outward 


92  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

circumstances  throwing  in  motives  adapted  to  the  existing 
temper  or  affections.  We  cannot  therefore  argue  from  the 
dependence  of  the  faculties,  that  the  particular  form  of 
their  exercise  is  determined  by  God.  The  faculties  them- 
selves are  not  the  full  cause  of  the  diversities  of  their  ope- 
rations :  and  therefore  to  support  them  is  not  to  support 
the  entire  cause,  much  less  to  be  the  cause.  There  is  not 
a  single  faculty  that  has  the  full  cause  in  itself.  The 
judgments  of  the  intellect  and  the  decisions  of  the  will  are 
botli  controlled  by  the  heart.  And  the  heart  itself  is  so 
far  dependent  on  the  intellect,  that  it  is  always  influenced 
by  motives  contemplated  by  that  faculty,  provided  they 
accord  with  its  own  taste.  The  faculty  of  the  heart  can 
never  account  for  all  the  diversities  of  its  operations.  The 
attraction  of  the  magnet  is  a  competent  and  efficient  cause 
of  the  motion  of  the  steel  towards  it :  but  if  it  had  such  a 
latitude  of  action  as  sometimes  to  attract  and  sometimes  to 
repel  the  same  object,  no  single  power  lodged  within  it 
could  be  the  cause  of  this  diversity  of  action.  The  faculty 
of  the  heart  cannot  account  for  a  man's  hating  rather  than 
loving  or  loving  rather  than  hating,  and  therefore  is  not 
the  full  cause  of  any  specific  mode  of  action.  If  the 
movements  of  this  faculty  involved  the  mechanism  of  ma- 
terial laws,  the  power  would  be  the  full  cause  of  the  ope- 
ration :  but  as  it  works  in  opposite  ways,  in  loving  and 
hating,  the  cause  of  this  diversity  must  be  sought  for  be- 
yond the  faculty.  When  therefore  you  say  that  God 
supports  the  faculty,  you  do  not  say  that  he  supports  the 
entire  cause  of  these  diversities,  much  less  that  he  is  him- 
self the  cause.     That  he  supports  the  life  and  faculties  of 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  93 

the  wicked,  is  no  proof  that  he  produces  all  their  wicked 
feelings. 

To  prove  our  spontaneity  in  originating  our  own  holy 
exercises,  an  appeal  is  often  made  to  our  consciousness- 
Never  was  an  appeal  less  supported.  What  are  we  con- 
scious of?  Entire  willingness  in  the  operations  of  our 
own  minds.  But  the  question  is  not  about  exercising, 
but  about  spontaneously  causing  our  own  volitions.  Now 
we  know  that  we  are  willing,  but  are  we  conscious  of 
willing  to  be  icilling  ?  The  very  question  answers  itself, 
and  refutes  this  confident  appeal.  Whatever  are  the  diffi- 
culties of  comprehending  this  subject,  I  think  we  can 
clearly  see  that  the  nature  of  our  exercises  is  the  same 
whether  they  are  divinely  caused  or  not.  My  thoughts  of 
you  and  my  love  to  you  are  what  they  are,  whether  origi- 
nated by  God  or  by  myself.  We  know  from  conscious- 
ness that  we  have  all  the  workings  of  a  rational  soul, 
and  that  they  are  perfectly  free  by  whomsoever  caused ; 
we  cannot  be  certain  from  their  nature  or  freeness, 
whether  they  are  caused  by  the  simple  powers  of  the  mind 
or  by  the  addition  of  a  foreign  impulse.  If  we  were  plainly 
told  that  God  had  "  wrought  all  our  works  in  us,"  we 
should  not  feel  them  to  be  less  our  own  or  less  free.  If 
we  were  told  that  he  had  made  us  "  willing  in  the  day  of 
his  "  power,"  we  should  be  no  less  conscious  of  being 
willing  and  free.  A  thought  is  a  thought  and  love  is  love 
however  caused.  We  cannot  therefore  draw  from  our 
conscious  freedom  any  argument  against  the  efficiency  of 
God. 

But  will  not  these  reasonings  prove  either  that  God  is 


94  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

the  efficient  cause  of  all  the  volitions  of  the  unregenerate, 
or  that  they  possess  the  self-determining  power  ?  I  think 
oot.  Self-love  and  a  submission  to  the  greatest  apparent 
good,  are  essential  to  all  beings  that  have  life.  A  worm 
prefers  pleasure  to  pain,  and  will  turn  aside  if  a  coal  of  fire 
is  laid  before  it.  Otherwise  it  could  not  have  both  the 
power  of  perception  and  of  muscular  motion.  If  God  sus- 
tains the  rational  existence  of  natural  men,  he  sustains  a 
nature  sure  to  be  influenced  by  the  strongest  motive  ad- 
dressed to  self-love.  Nothing  more  is  necessary  on  his 
part  than  to  withhold  his  sanctifying  grace,  to  convert 
that  self-love  into  selfishness.  It  remains  in  subjection 
while  the  love  of  God  rules  the  heart ;  but  as  soon  as  that 
superior  is  withdrawn,  the  servant,  by  a  mere  change  of 
relations,  becomes  the  master ;  and  from  its  very  nature  it 
cannot  be  a  master  without  being  a  tyrant  and  a  traitor. 
No  divine  power  is  necessary  in  all  this  process  but  to  sup- 
port the  rational  existence.  And  if  nature  itself,  thus 
supported,  works  in  this  way,  by  the  mere  preponderance 
of  motives  addressed  to  selfishness,  there  needs  no  self-de- 
termining power.  In  supporting  nature  God  supports  rea- 
son and  self-love  and  the  empire  of  the  greatest  apparent 
good;  and  the  sin  comes  from  men's  not  keeping 
self-love  in  subjection  by  the  dominant  love  of  God.  This 
is  their  own  fault.  They  are  bound,  even  without  the 
application  of  divine  efiiciency,  to  love  God  supremely, 
because  they  have  rational  souls  and  are  capable  of  under- 
standing his  will.  But  does  no  self-determining  power 
act  in  all  the  multiform  ragings  of  their  selfishness  ?  No : 
their  supreme  regard  for  the  gratification  of  their  own  pro- 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY,  95 

pensities,  into  which  their  self-love,  (their  essential  nature,) 
turns  when  they  neglect  the  love  of  God,  must  be  roused 
to  all  these  ragings  by  the  pressure  of  adapted  and  suffi- 
ciently powerful  motives  :  for  to  be  influenced  by  motives 
and  to  be  controlled  by  the  greatest  apparent  good,  are 
essential  to  their  nature.  Let  their  nature,  in  all  its  attri- 
butes, be  supported  by  its  Author,  and  they  change  its 
operations,  not  by  a  self-determining  power,  but  by  with- 
holding their  love  from  God.  By  that  single  neglect,  and 
not  by  a  self-determining  power,  they  cause  the  laws  of 
nature,  which  the  God  of  nature  must  support,  to  work  re>- 
bellion.  But  though  the  wicked  rage  without  any  appli- 
cation of  divine  efficiency  but  to  support  the  harmless  laws 
of  nature,  not  without  that  efficiency  do  they  turn  from 
supreme  enmity  to  the  supreme  love  of  God. 

Still  God  has  the  absolute  control  of  mind  in  all  its 
common  operations  :  else  how  could  he  govern  the  world  ? 
Whether  he  does  this  by  the  mere  force  of  motives  adapted 
to  the  existing  temper,  or  sometimes  by  a  lower  sort  of 
efficiency,  not  however  productive  of  sin,  I  will  not  deter- 
mine. But  the  fact  is  incontrovertible.  "  The  king's 
heart  is  in  the  hand  of  the  Lord  as  the  rivers  of  water  : 
he  turneth  it  whithersoever  he  will."  "  The  preparations 
of  the  heart  in  man  and  the  answer  of  the  tongue  is  from 
the  Lord."  "  There  are  many  devices  in  a  man's  heart ; 
nevertheless  the  counsel  of  the  Lord,  that  shall  stand." 
"  A  man's  heart  deviseth  his  way,  but  the  Lord  directeth 
his  steps."  "  O  Lord,  I  know  that  the  way  of  man  is  not 
m  himself:  it  is  not  in  man  that  walketh  to  direct  his 
steps."     "  Man's  goings  are  of  the  Lord  ;  how  can  a  man 


96  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

then  understand  his  own  way  V  "  He  fashioneth  their 
hearts  alike."  "  In  him  we  live  and  move  and  have  our 
being."  Are  not  some  of  these  motions  voluntary  ?  Then, 
besides  living  in  him,  we  voluntarily  move  in  him.  Then 
somehow  he  causes  our  willingness  as  he  does  our  life. 
"  Who  is  he  that  saith  and  it  cometh  to  pass  when  the 
Lord  commandeth  it  not  ?"  "  There  is  no  wisdom  nor  un- 
derstanding nor  counsel  against  the  Lord."  "  Arise  and 
go  down  to  the  potter's  house,  and  there  I  will  cause  thee 
to  hear  my  words.  Then  I  went  down  to  the  potter's 
house,  and  behold  he  wrought  a  work  on  the  wheels.  And 
the  vessel  that  he  made  of  clay  was  marred  in  the  hand 
of  the  potter.  So  he  made  it  again  another  vessel,  as 
seemed  good  to  the  potter  to  make  it.  Then  the  word  of 
the  Lord  came  to  me  saying,  O  house  of  Israel,  cannot  I 
do  with  you  as  this  potter,  saith  the  Lord  1  Behold  as 
the  clay  is  in  the  potter's  hand,  so  are  ye  in  my  hand,  O 
house  of  Israel.  At  what  instant  I  shall  speak  concerning 
a  nation  and  concerning  a  kingdom,  to  pluck  up  and  to 
pull  down  and  to  destroy  it;  if  that  nation  against  whom  I 
have  pronounced,  turn  from  their  evil,  I  will  repent  of  the 
evil  that  I  thought  to  do  unto  them.  And  at  what  instant 
I  shall  speak  concerning  a  nation  and  concerning  a  king- 
dom, to  build  and  to  plant  it ;  if  it  do  evil  in  my  sight,  that  it 
obey  not  my  voice,  then  I  will  repent  of  the  good  wherewith 
I  said  I  would  benefit  them."  How  many  volitions  he 
must  control  to  accomplish  all  this.  "  Shall  the  axe  boast 
itself  against  him  that  heweth  therewith?  or  shall  the  saw 
magnify  itself  against  him  that  shaketh  it  ?  as  if  the  rod 
should  shake  itself  against  them  that  lift  it  up,  or  as  if  the 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  97 

Staff  should  lift  up  itself  as  if  it  were  no  wood. '  "  Thou 
art  my  battle  axe  and  weapon  of  war  :  for  with  thee  will  1 
break  in  pieces  the  nations,  and  with  thee  will  I  destroy 
kingdoms."* 

A  number  of  cases  in  the  sacred  history  are  referred  to 
in  the  margin,!  in  which  God  controlled  the  hearts  of  men 
in  common  matters.  I  will  only  ask,  how  Could  Christians 
pray  for  relief  in  a  thousand  cases,  if  they  could  not  confide 
in  his  absolute  power  to  control  the  heart  ?  How  otherwise 
could  Jacob  have  prayed  for  deliverance  from  the  rage  of 
Esau,  or  have  said  about  the  unknown  lord  of  Egypt,  "  God 
Almighty  give  you  mercy  before  the  man,  that  he  may  send 
away  your  other  brother  and  Benjamin"  ?  How  otherwise 
could  Jehoshaphat  have  prayed  for  his  assailants  to  depart 
from  him  ?  or  Esther  and  the  Jews  for  the  success  of  her 
intercession  with  Ahasuerus  ?|  In  some  instances  where 
the  operation  could  not  perhaps  be  called  sanctification, 
there  seemed  to  be  a  direct  influence  upon  the  heart,  '•'  He 
made  them  also  to  be  pitied  of  all  those  that  carried  them 
captives."  "  In  Judah  the  hand  of  God  was  to  give  them 
one  heart  to  do  the  commandment  of  the  king  and  of  the 
princes  by  the  word  of  the  Lord."     When  "  the  fathers  of 

*Ps.  33.  15.  Prov.16. 1,9.  andl9.  21.and20.-24.  and  21.  l,3(i. 
Isai.  10. 15.  Jer.  10.  23.  and  18.  2—10.  and  51.  20.  Lam.  3.  37.  AcLs 
17.  28. 

t  Gen.  32.  6,  11.  with  ch.  33.  4.  Exod.  3.  21.  and  11.  3.  and  12. 
36.  and  34.  24.  Josh.  2.  24.  with  Exod.  15.  15.  with  Ps.  48.  4—0 
Judg.  7.  21 ,  22.  and  14.  4.  2  Kin.  24.  2,  3.  2  Chron.  20.  22, 23.  and 
21.  10.  Ez.  1.  1.  and  G.  22.  and  7.  27.  Isai.  10.  5—7.  Jer.  51.  TT, 
12.  Hag.  1.  14.  John  7.  30.  and  8.  20. 

t  Gen.  32.  11.  and  43.  14.     2  Chron.  18.  31    Esth.  4.  iC>. 
9 


98  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

Judah  and  Benjamin"  went  up  to  Jerusalem,  in  the  days 
of  Cyrus,  "  to  build  the  house  of  the  Lord,"  it  was  "  God" 
who  ''had  raised"  their  "spirit"  to  that  high  emprise. 
And  it  was  he  who,  in  the  days  of  Darius,  "  stirred  up  the 
spirit  of  Zerubbabel — and  the  spirit  of  all  the  remnant  of 
the  people"  to  the  same  work.*  Even  in  the  motions  of  sin, 
(though  only  permissively,  I  suppose,)  his  government  is 
effectual.  "He  turned  their  heart  to  hate  his  people,  to 
deal  subtilly  with  his  servants."  God  "  moved  David"  to 
number  the  people  ;  and  in  all  cases,  "  whom  he  will  he 
hardeneth."t 

But  all  these  operations  are  distinguishable  from  that 
which  produces  holiness.  These  fall  within  the  range  of 
nature,  but  sanctifying  grace  is  supernatural.  The  former  is 
ascribed  to  God  ;  the  latter  to  the  holy  Spirit,  and  consti- 
tutes his  distinctive  work  as  one  of  the  Persons  of  the  Tri- 
nity. Take  away  that  supernatural  operation  which  sancti- 
fies, and  what  is  there  left  of  the  office  work  of  the  Spirit  ? 
or  how  is  he  made  known  as  one  of  the  Sacred  Persons  ? 

The  great  thing  which  our  brethren  oppose  is  a  direct 
operation  on  the  mind,  as  working,  in  their  view,  a  "  physi- 
cal change"  inconsistent  with  freedom.  But  the  causing 
of  a  moral  effect  is  not  a  physical  change.  Were  a  new 
faculty  created,  it  would  indeed  be  a  physical  change.  If 
that  moral  effect  is  wrought  by  truth,  the  power  which  brings 
truth  into  view  must  be  applied  directly  to  the  truth  or  di- 
rectly to  the  mind.  It  cannot  be  applied  to  the  truth.  That 
would  produce  a  change  in  truth  itself     But  truth  cannot 

*  Ps.  lOG.  46.  2  Chron.  30.  12.  Ez.  1.  5.  Hag.  1.  14. 
\  2  Sam.  24.  1.   Ps.  105.  25.  Rom.  9.  18. 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 


99 


change.  Two  and  two  make  four.  What  change  can 
that  truth  undergo?  The  sinner  has  rebelled  against 
God.  What  change  can  take  place  in  that  truth  1  And 
what  is  that  power  which  produces  no  change  in  the 
thing  to  which  it  is  applied?  And  if  the  power  is 
applied  directly  to  the  mind,  to  make  truth  seen,  attended 
to,  felt,  and  loved,  it  is  all  we  ask.  And  are  you  sure 
that  the  application  of  power  to  the  understanding  and 
conscience,  to  make  truth  seen,  attended  to,  and  felt,  is 
any  more  consistent  with  freedom,  than  the  application  of 
power  to  the  heart  to  make  truth  loved  ? 

God  can  doubtless  say,  Let  the  mind  see  truth, — in 
any  degree  of  clearness, — and  it  is  done  ;  just  as  Christ 
willed  to  appear  among  his  disciples,  the  doors  being  shut, 
and  he  appeared.  If  you  say,  in  this  case  no  one  can  tell 
on  what  the  power  operated,  and  no  one  can  tell  on  what 
the  power  operates  in  the  other  case  ;  yet  we  can  tell  on 
what  the  change  takes  place.  As  there  are  but  two  sub- 
jects concerned, — mind  and  truth, — the  change  must  be 
in  one  or  the  other  or  both  :  but  as  no  change  can  possibly 
take  place  in  truth,  it  must  be  in  the  mind  alone.  And 
the  change  by  which  truth  is  first  seen,  cannot  be  wrought 
through  the  truth,  otherwise  than  as  truth  is  the  object 
seen.  That  the  mind  first  sees  it,  must  be  owing  to  a 
clearer  discernment  in  the  mind  itself,  not  produced  by 
the  object.  This  probably  will  not  be  denied.  Here 
then  is  one  direct  act  upon  the  mind  that  does  not  destroy 
freedom.  In  the  next  two  acts,  by  which  truth  is  attended 
to  and  felt,  they  will  say  that  the  influence  is  carried  on 


HX>  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

through  the  instrumentality  of  truth ;  and  that  I  am  not 
disposed  to  deny.  But  all  this  influence  produces  nothing 
but  awakening  and  conviction.  This  is  not  therefore  the 
act  about  which  we  are  inquiring.  Come  then  right  to 
the  point.  Does  God,  by  an  influence  on  the  heart,  cause 
it  to  love  the  truth  ? 

You  say,  he  changes  the  heart  through  the  truth ;  and 
you  mean  that  he  does  not  act  immediately  on  the  heart, 
bin  only  presents  truth  to  the  clear  view  of  the  understand- 
ing, and  there  leaves  it.  Then  it  is  not  God,  but  illu- 
mined truth,  seen  in  its  own  affecting  aspects  and  relations, 
that  works  the  change,  so  far  as  it  is  wrought  by  any 
thmg  but  the  mind  itself  But  as  truth  does  not  control 
the  mind,  (as  is  every  where  asserted,)  it  is  the  mind  that 
turns  itself  under  the  inducements  which  truth  offers. 
And  that  is  exactly  the  self-determining  power. 

If  this  is  so,  God  cannot  be  said  to  convert  men.  If 
he  only  sends  in  illumined  truth,  which  Peter,  by  the  self- 
determining  power,  loves,  he  also  sends  in  illumined  truth, 
which  Judas,  by  the  self-determining  power,  hates,  and 
hates  in  proportion  as  it  is  illumined :  and  except  his  aim- 
ing at  the  effect  in  the  former  case  and  not  in  the  latter, 
he  may  be  said  as  truly  to  cause  Judas  to  hate  as  to  cause 
Peter  to  love.  He  merely  presents  the  object,  which  in 
one  instance  is  hated  and  in  the  other  is  loved. 

In  this  theory  of  the  self-determining  power,  I  find 
nothing  but  effects  without  a  cause.  Here  are  Peter  and 
Judas,  twin  minds  we  will  suppose,  of  exactly  the  same 
faculties,  tempers,  and  habits,  and  urged  on  by  the  same 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  101 

motives :  for  that  is  certainly  a  supposable  case.*  At  ten 
o'clock  they  both  oppose.  At  eleven  Peter  yields  and  Judas 
still  resists.  What  has  produced  this  difference  ?  What 
caused  Peter,  with  his  powers  and  habits  and  temper,  to 
love,  while  Judas,  with  the  same  powers  and  habits  and 
temper,  continues  to  hate?  The  same  causes  should  pro- 
duce the  same  effects.  You  must  either  say  that  Peter 
chose  to  love,  (placing  a  volition  before  every  volition,  and 
one  before  the  first,)  and  Judas  did  not,  or  you  must  look 
for  a  cause  out  of  Peter.  You  cannot  find  it  in  the  mo- 
tives; for  the  same  pressure  of  truth,  by  the  supposition, 
IS  made  upon  Judas  as  upon  Peter.  In  short  there  is  an 
effect  without  a  cause,  unless  that  cause  is  found  in  God. 
Mind  is  doubtless  the  cause  of  mental  exercises  in  a 
certain  sense,  as  without  mind  there  could  be  no  exercises, 
and  it  is  the  mind  itself  that  exercises.  But  when  you  see 
two  minds  of  the  same  stamp,  and  under  the  pressure  of 
the  same  motives,  put  forth  opposite  exercises,  that  differ- 
ence must  have  a  cause  distinct  from  mind  or  motives. 
Or  to  fix  the  eye  on  one,  the  mighty  change  from  hatred 
to  love  in  Peter,  while  Judas  remains  the  same,  must  have 
a  cause  other  than  the  faculties,  habits,  and  temper,  which 

*  In  the  first  chapter  it  was  allowed  to  be  doubtful,  on  their 
principles,  whether  the  Spirit  pressed  motives  so  far  upon  Judas  as 
upon  Peter,  on  account  of  foreseeing  that  they  would  not  prevail, 
but  would  only  make  him  worse.  Now,  as  the  present  argument 
is  concerned,  it  matters  not  whether  the  Spirit  actually  applies  an 
equality  of  motives  without  success,  or  sees  that  they  would  be 
without  success  if  applied.  The  failure  of  the  motives  as  contem- 
plated by  the  Spirit,  is  the  same  to  the  argument  as  an  actual 
failure. 

9* 


102  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY. 

are  common  ;  other  than  the  motives  which  are  common. 
The  only  question  is  about  that  cause  :  not  whether  Peter 
is  capable  of  exercising  love  without  the  Spirit ;  for  Judas 
is  equally  capable  and  does  not  do  it :  not  whether  Peter 
really  puts  forth  the  exercise  himself,  with  all  the  spon- 
taneity and  freedom  that  mind  can  possibly  have ;  for  no 
one  doubts  of  that :  but  what  causes  Peter's  hatred  to 
change  to  love  when  that  of  Judas  remains  the  same  ?  If 
you  say,  it  is  the  self-determining  power,  I  meet  no  answer 
there.  Why  does  the  self-determining  power  act  so  diffe- 
rently in  different  men  under  exactly  the  same  circum- 
stances ?  If  you  say  again,  Peter  chose  to  love  and 
Judas  did  not,  the  question  still  returns,  icliy  did  Peter 
choose  so  differently  from  Judas  under  precisely  the  same 
circumstances?  To  say,  he  chose  to  choose  differently, 
is  only  running  back  through  an  endless  chain,  and  leav- 
hig  at  last  an  effect  without  a  cause.  If  to  escape  from 
this  difficulty  you  change  the  ground  and  say,  the  pressure 
of  truth  was  not  the  same  in  both  cases  ;  then  you  give  up 
your  favourite  tenet,  that  God  does  the  best  he  can  for  all 
and  eacli.  Or  if  you  say,  he  foresaw  that  no  further  pres- 
sure of  motives  would  avail  with  Judas,  then  this  contem- 
plated failure  of  equal  motives  is  the  same  to  my  argument 
as  an  actual  failure  of  equal  motives.  What  ground  was 
there  for  God  to  foresee  that  the  same  motives  would  fail 
with  one  and  prevail  with  the  other  ?  What  was  the  cause 
of  that  foreseen  certainty  1  But  I  deny  that  the  mind,  in 
the  clearest  view  of  truth,  will  love  without  the  action  of 
divine  efficiency.  No  where  below  the  heavens  is  truth 
more  clearly  seen  than  in  hell,  but  no  love  is  there.      To 


DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  103 

say,  it  is  because  the  Spirit  does  not  place  it  before  them, 
is  to  say,  it  is  because  they  do  not  see  it  with  sufficient 
clearness.  But  that  they  see  it  less  clearly  than  do  the 
saints  on  earth,  (bating  their  blindness  to  its  glory,)  is  more 
than  you  can  prove  or  I  believe.  And  certainly  they  see 
it  clearly  enough  to  hate  it  with  eternal  rancour.  To  say, 
it  is  because  there  is  no  hope,  is  to  say  that  no  man  can 
love  God  without  a  bribe.  Dr  Taylor  reckons  all  love  to 
God  to  be  prompted  by  self-interest;  but  the  very  reason 
why  the  mere  view  of  truth  will  not  prevail,  is  that  the 
love  which  the  truth  requires,  and  which  alone  can  relish 
the  truth,  is  altogether  different  from  the  promptings  of 
self-love  and  of  nature.  And  while  the  heart  remains 
supremely  selfish,  the  service  of  God  to  which  the  truth 
invites,  will  not  appear  the  greatest  good.  There  must  be 
a  direct  action  of  the  Spirit  upon  the  heart,  conforming  it 
to  the  holy  and  benevolent  nature  of  truth,  before  it  will 
be  persuaded  by  truth  to  love  God. 


CHAPTER   VI 

Importance  and  Instrumentality  of  Truth. 

The  intellect,  the  memory,  the  heart,  the  will,  cannot 
act  without  a  subject  or  object  or  reason  of  action.  With- 
out truth  there  is  no  object,  (except  errour,)  for  the  under- 
standing to  consider,  the  memory  to  recall,  the  heart  to 
love,  hate,  desire,  dread,  rejoice  in  or  regret,  or  by  which 
the  will  can  be  moved.  Except  so  far  as  errour  thrusts 
itself  into  the  place  of  truth,  truth  is  the  only  thing  seen 
or  felt,  loved,  hated,  desired,  dreaded,  rejoiced  in,  or  sor- 
rowed for,  and  offers  the  only  considerations  in  view  of 
which  the  mind  acts.  It  presents  all  those  considerations 
and  objects  from  which  the  intellect  forms  its  reasonings, 
its  judgments,  its  expectations  ;  which  the  heart  regards 
with  delight  or  aversion,  with  joy  or  sorrow,  with  gratitude, 
hope,  or  fear  ;  and  from  which  the  will  forms  all  its  de- 
cisions. In  short,  truth  is  the  necessary  means  of  all  the 
operations  of  mind  which  are  not  guided  by  errour.  With- 
out it  there  can  be  no  right  exercises  at  all.  It  is  that 
which  the  heart  enjoys,  and  without  which  there  can  be 
no  holy  happiness.  It  is  that  which  forms  all  the  enno- 
bling furniture  which  we  call  knowledge.  If  knowledge 
serves  any  purpose  in  the  exaltation  and    happiness  of 


106  IMPORTANCE  AND  INSTRUMENTALITV 

mind,  the  same  purpose  is  served  by  truth,  for  nothing  but 
truth  can  be  known.  Without  truth  there  would  be  no 
knowledge,  no  holy  happiness,  no  holy  exercises,  no  truly 
rational  action.  Even  God  glorified  is  nothing  but  truth 
displayed.  If  it  is  important  that  all  worlds  should  be 
filled  with  the  glory  of  God,  it  is  important  that  truth 
should  flood  the  universe.  All  the  infinitely  grand  and 
expensive  measures  which  God  has  taken  to  make  himself 
known,  are  only  measures  to  pour  truth  upon  the  eyes  of 
the  creation.  The  only  good  resulting  fi-om  the  mission, 
death,  and  reign  of  Christ,  is  involved  in  truth  displayed. 
What  is  the  law  of  God,  with  all  its  penalties  and  rewards, 
but  truth  presented  in  the  form  of  knowledge,  imposing 
obligations,  and  offering  motives  to  obedience?  The 
eternal  empire  of  Jehovah  over  a  universe  of  moral  agents, 
is  sustained  by  nothing  but  truth, — is  nothing  but  truth 
illustrated  and  applied  as  motives  to  obedience,  adoration, 
and  praise.  Infinite  is  the  value  of  truth  as  an  instrument 
of  divine  government,  as  a  medium  of  revealing  the  divine 
glory ;  two  things  which  act  and  react  upon  each  other. 
The  government  of  God  and  all  the  sanctions  of  his  law, 
and  all  the  discoveries  of  him  in  creation,  providence,  and 
grace,  are  no  other  than  glorious  truths  to  feed  the  under- 
standings and  sway  the  hearts  and  lives  of  creatures.  If 
truth  is  not  important  in  this  office,  the  moral  empire  of 
God  and  all  the  discoveries  of  his  glory  have  been  in  vain. 
The  word  of  God  is  nothing  but  a  body  of  truth  :  and  it 
may  be  expected  of  that  revelation  that  it  will  not  discredit 
truth  by  pronouncing  it  useless  in  governing  and  blessins 
the  universe. 


OF  TRUTH.  107 

Thai  expectation  is  realized.  It  seems  even  to  be 
suggested  that  there  is  no  salvation  where  the  Gospel  does 
not  come.  "Whosoever  shall  call  upon  the  name  of  the 
Lord  shall  be  saved.  How  then  shall  they  call  on  him  in 
whom  they  have  not  believed?  and  how  shall  they  believe 
in  him  of  whom  they  have  not  heard  ? — So  then  faith 
Cometh  by  hearing  and  hearing  by  the  word  of  God."* 
And  as  it  is  by  faith  that  God  purifies  the  heart,t  Christ- 
ians are  said  to  be  "  clean  through  the  word."|  Because 
the  Ephesians  believed  and  trusted  in  God  "  after  that" 
they  had  "  heard  the  word  of  truth,"  that  word  is  called 
"  the  Gospel  of"  their  "  salvation. "§  "It  pleased  God  by 
the  foolishness  of  preaching  to  save  them  that  believe." |1 
If  the  "ingrafted  word"  is  received  with  the  "meekness" 
of  faith,  it  "is  able  to  save"  the  soul.^  God  "called" 
the  Thessalonians  "  to  salvation  through  sanctification  of 
the  Spirit  and  belief  of  the  truth,"  "by"  the  "Gospel" 
which  Paul  had  preached.**  To  denote  that  a  divine 
energy  attended  the  word,  it  is  said,  "  His  word  was  with 
power."  And  yet  the  mere  word  did  no  more  than  when 
it  was  said,  Be  thou  made  whole.  "  Our  Gospel  came  not 
unto  you  in  word  only,  but  also  in  power  and  in  the  Holy 
Ghost."  "  My  speech  and  my  preaching  was — in  demon- 
stration of  the  Spirit  and  of  power  ;  that  your  faith  should 
not  stand  in  the  wisdom  of  men,  but  in  the  power  of 
God. "ft  "  The  preaching  of  the  cross — unto  us  which 
are  saved, — is  the  power  of  God."||     The  Agent  and  the 

*  Rom.  10.  13—17.  John  17.  20  t  Acts  15.  9.  j  John  15.  3. 
§  Eph.  1.  13.  il  1  Cor.  1.  21.  IT  James  1.  21.  **  2  Thes.  2.  13, 
14.    tt  Luke  4.  32.     1  Cor.  2.  4,  5.     1  Thes.  1.  5.     It  1  Cor.  1.  18. 


108  IMPORTANCE  AND  INSTRUMENTALITY 

means  are  sometimes  thrown  together  in  a  sort  of  mystical 
confusion.  "  I  commend  you  to  God  and  to  the  word  of 
his  grace,  which  is  able  to  build  you  up  and  to  give  you 
an  inheritance  among  all  them  which  are  sanctified."* 
By  a  figure  of  speech  intended  to  denote  the  comparative 
hardness  of  different  people,  it  is  said  that  if  the  Gospel 
had  been  carried  to  others  they  would  have  believed  ;t 
which  cannot  mean,  even  upon  the  opposite  plan,  that 
they  would  have  believed  without  the  Spirit.  "  For  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  not  in  word  but  in  power. "|  Minis- 
ters, as  they  plant  and  water  the  field,  are  fellow  labourers 
with  him  who  gives  the  increase.  "  Who  then  is  Paul 
and  who  is  Apollos  but  ministers  by  whom  ye  believed, 
even  as  the  Lord  gave  to  every  man  ?  I  have  planted, 
Apollos  watered,  but  God  gave  the  increase.  So  then 
neither  is  he  that  planteth  any  thing,  neither  he  that  water- 
eth,  but  God  that  giveth  the  increase. — We  are  labourers 
together  with  God."§  In  conviction,  and  especially  in 
repentance,  truth  penetrates  the  heart  like  sharp  arrows 
or  a  drawn  sword,  or,  like  fire  and  a  hammer  upon  a  rock, 
it  breaks  it  in  pieces.  "  Thine  arrows  are  sharp  in  the 
heart  of  the  king's  enemies,  whereby  the  people  fall  under 
thee."  "  The  sword  of  the  Spirit,  which  is  the  word  of 
God."  "  For  the  word  of  God  is  quick  and  powerful, 
and  sharper  than  any  two  edged  sword,  piercing  even  to  the 
dividing  asunder  of  soul  and  spirit,  and  of  the  joints  and 
marrow,  and  is  a  discerner  of  the  thoughts  and   intents 

*  Acts  20.  32.       t  Ezek.  3.  G.    Matt.  11.  21.       t  1  Cor.  4.  20. 
§  1  Cor.  3.  5—9. 


OF  TRUTH. 


109 


of  the  heart."     "  Is  not  my  word  like  as  a  fire — and  like  a 
hammer  that  breaketh  the  rock  in  pieces  ?"* 

Thus  far  there  is  nothing  which  has  the  least  sem- 
blance of  opposition  to  divine  efficiency.  We  come  now 
to  a  new  class  of  texts.  By  an  easy  figure  the  speaker 
is  so  identified  with  the  word  spoken,  that  to  him  is  as- 
cribed the  instrumentality  of  the  latter.  The  word  is 
dropt  from  view  and  he  is  put  for  the  whole.  By  exactly 
the  same  figure  the  word  is  so  identified  with  the  divine 
Agent  who  wields  it,  that  the  energy  of  the  Spirit  is  as- 
cribed to  the  word.  The  Spirh  is  dropt  from  the  account 
and  the  word  is  put  for  the  whole.  In  both  cases  the 
nearest  and  most  visible  cause  is  selected  as  that  on  which 
the  imagination  most  naturally  dwells.  The  perfect  same- 
ness of  the  figure  in  the  two  cases  however,  ought  effectu- 
ally to  guard  against  misconstruction.  And  even  our 
brethren  cannot  insist  on  a  literal  meaning  :  for  that  would 
entirely  exclude  the  word  in  one  case  and  the  illuminating 
Spirit  in  the  other. 

"  Go  ye — and  disciple  all  nations.'.'  "  Delivering  thee 
from — the  Gentiles,  unto  whom  now  I  send  thee,  to  open 
their  eyes  and  to  turn  them  from  darkness  to  light  and  from 
the  power  of  Satan  unto  God."  "  And  he  shall  iui-h  the 
heart  of  the  fathers  to  the  children  and  the  heart  of  the 
children  to  their  fathers."!  Here  the  eye  is  filled  with 
the  nearest  object,  and  the  more  remote  object  is  put  out 
of  view.  Now  turn  to  the  other  texts  which  fill  the  eye 
with  the  next  nearest  object  and  put  out  of  view  the  Agent 

*  Pa.  45.  5.     Jer.  23.  29.     Heb.  4.  12.     Rev.  1.  IG.  and  2.  12. 

t  Mai.  4.  6.    Mat.  28.  19.     Luke  1.  17.    Acts  2G.  17, 18. 
10 


110  IMPORTANCE  AND  INSTRUMENTALITY 

behind  the  scene.  "  So  shall  my  word  be  that  goeth  forth 
out  of  my  mouth  :  it  shall  not  return  unto  me  void,  but  it 
shall  accomplish  that  which  I  please,  and  it  shall  prosper 
in  the  thing  whereto  I  sent  it."  "  The  word  of  God  is 
not  bound."  "  So  mightily  grew  the  word  of  God  and 
prevailed  ;"  the  Holy  Ghost,  though  enforcing  it  with  mi- 
raculous power,  being  not  named.  "  For  this  cause  also 
thank  we  God  without  ceasing,  because  when  ye  received 
the  word  of  God  which  ye  heard  of  us,  ye  received  it,  not 
as  the  word  of  men,  but,  as  it  is  in  truth,  the  Avord  of  God, 
which  effectually  worketh  also  in  you  that  believe."  Com- 
pare that  however  with  this  :  "  He  that  wrought  effectually 
in  Peter  to  the  apostleship  of  the  circumcision,  the  same 
was  mighty  in  me  towards  the  Gentiles."  Again  :  "  Ye 
shall  know  the  truth  and  the  truth  shall  make  you  free  ;" 
meaning,  from  sin.  "It  is  written  in  the  prophets.  And 
they  shall  be  all  taught  of  God.  Every  man  therefore 
that  hath  heard  and  hath  learnt  of  the  Father,  cometh 
unto  me."  Every  man  is  in  darkness  until  he  is  enlight- 
ened from  above.  .For  "the  natural  man  receiveth  not 
the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God ;  for  they  are  foolishness 
unto  him  ;  neither  caii  he  know  them  because  they  are 
spuliuuUy  discerned."  "  It  is  the  Spirit  that  quickeneth, 
the  flesh  profiteth  nothing  :  the  words  that  I  speak  unto 
you,  they  are  spirit  and  they  are  life."  This  strong  figure 
by  which  the  Gospel  is  called  spirit  and  life,  cannot  ex- 
clude the  holy  Spirit,  for  he  is  named  in  this  very  sentence 
as  the  real  quickener.  "  Not  of  the  letter,  [the  law,]  but 
of  the  spirit;  [the  Gospel,  called  in  the  context  "the 
ministration  of  the  Spirit,"    because  accompanied  with 


OP  TRUTH.  Ill 

larger  measures  of  the  Spirit  than  the  law  of  Moses  ;]  for 
the  letter  killeth,  but  the  spirit  givetli  life."  "  Thy  word 
hath  quickened  me  ;"  explained  by  this  other  clause  in  the 
context,  "  I  will  never  forget  thy  precepts,  for  with  them 
tliou  hast  quickened  me."* 

Take  another  set  of  texts  in  which  the  same  thing 
occurs  in  relation  to  both  objects.  "  If  any  of  you  do  err 
from  the  truth  and  one  convert  him,  let  him  know  that  he 
which  converteth  the  sinner — shall  save  a  soul  from  death." 
Here  no  account  is  made  of  the  word,  but  only  of  the  man 
who  utters  it.  In  the  next  that  I  shall  cite,  all  account  is 
made  of  the  word  and  none  of  the  Spirit.  "  The  law  of 
the  Lord  is  perfect,  converting  the  soul."  These  forms  of 
expression  are  analagous  to  others  of  every  day's  occur- 
rence. We  say  for  instance,  that  Peter  and  John  healed 
the  lame  man  at  the  Beautiful  gate  of  the  temple,  and  it  is 
so  expressed  in  the  Contents  of  the  chapter ;  but  Peter 
said  to  the  wondering  multitude,  "  Why  look  ye  so  earn- 
estly on  us,  as  though  by  our  own  power  or  holiness  we 
had  made  this  man  to  walk  ?"t 

Thus  far,  I  think,  there  is  nothing  that  either  sets 
aside  the  effxient  action  of  the  Spirit  or  explains  the  mode 
of  his  operation.  Indeed  where  the  Spirit  is  not  mentioned 
it  behooves  our  brethren  to  supply  the  defect  as  well  as  us  ; 
for  they,  no  less  than  we,  hold  to  the  necessity  of  the 
Spirit's  operation. 

*  Ps.  119.  50,  03.  Isai.  5.5.  11.  John  C.  45,  G3.  and  8.  32,34. 
Acts  19.  20.  ICor.  2.  14.  2  Cor.  3.  6,  8.  Gal.  2.  8.  1  Thes.2. 
13.     2  Tim.  2.  9. 

t  Ps.  19.  7.     Acts  3.  12.     James  5. 19,  20. 


112  IMPORTANCE  AND  INSTRUMENTALITY 

We  now  come  to  two  texts  whicli,  taken  in  any  thing 
like  a  literal  sense,  would  seem  to  favour  our  brethren ; 
but  upon  that  construction  they  would  contradict  several 
hundred  texts  which  hold  a  different  language,  as  we  shall 
have  occasion  to  see.  They  speak  of  the  word  as  the 
seed  by  which  the  children  are  formed  in  the  second  birth, 
and  the  act  of  the  father  as  merely  introducing  that  seed. 
The  two  passages  are  these  :  "  Born  again,  not  of  corrupt- 
ible seed  but  of  incorruptible,  by  the  word  of  God."  "  Of 
his  own  will  begat  he  us  with  the  word  of  truth."  There 
is  a  third  text  wliicli  speaks  of  the  seed  without  explaining 
the  reference,  but  from  the  other  two  we  must  conclude 
that  the  reference  is  to  the  word.  "  Whosoever  is  born  of 
God  doth  not  commit  sin ;  for  his  seed  remaineth  in  him, 
and  he  cannot  sin  because  he  is  born  of  God."*  I  do  not 
say  that  these  are  all  the  texts  which  thus  speak,  but  I  say, 
they  are  all  that  I  could  find;  and  I  have  taken  great 
pains  to  collect  the  whole.  At  present  I  must  believe  that 
these  are  the  only  texts  Avhich  have  given  countenance  to 
the  doctrine  which  is  so  triumphantly  sounded  in  every 
street,  that  we  are  begotten  and  horn  again  through  the 
word. 

Now  for  the  meaning  of  these  texts.  As  truth  is  that 
in  view  of  which  the  intellect  and  heart  act,  and  without 
which  there  could  be  no  active  life ;  in  other  words,  as  all 
the  exercises  of  the  new  man  grow,  as  it  were,  out  of  truth  ; 
this  is  spoken  of  as  the  seed  which  is  wrought  up  into  the 
living  man.      But  this  is  strongly  figurative  upon  every 

*  James  J .  IS.     1  Tct.  1.  23.     1  John  3.  9. 


OF  TRUTH.  113 

construction.  Truth  docs  not  groio  up  into  a  Christian. 
Every  body  sees  that.  And  when  the  language  is  ascer- 
tained to  be  figurative,  we  are  at  full  liberty  to  inquire  of 
other  texts  how  far  the  figure  swells  or  varies  the  literal 
meaning.  That  it  does  vary  it  in  some  degree  is  certain  ; 
but  how  far,  cannot  be  settled  by  the  texts  themselves,  but 
must  be  learnt  from  the  general  tenour  of  Scripture  and  fi-om 
common  sense.  We  have  already  seen  that  truth  is  in- 
troduced to  the  view  of  the  mind  by  an  action,  not  on  truth, 
hut  on  the  mind  itself.  This  is  one  important  variation 
from  the  literal  import  of  the  figure.  Let  another  similar 
one  be  supposed,  namely,  that  by  an  action  on  the  heart 
God  causes  it  to  love  as  well  as  see  the  truth,  and  it  is  all 
we  ask. 

There  are  three  other  texts  which  have  been  brought 
to  support  the  literal  meaning  of  this  figure,  which  do  not 
apply.  Men  are  said  to  beget  by  establishing  the  figura- 
tive relation  of  father  and  son.  Thus  Paul  begat  his  son 
Onesimus,  and  he  begat  the  Corinthians  "  through  the 
Gospel."  But  this  was  not  God  begetting ;  nor  does  it 
express  God's  power  in  regeneration.  Not  God  but  Paul 
is  the  father  in  this  figure.  But  even  Paul  claims  to  have 
begotten  them  "through  the  Gospel;"  which  fully 
shows  that  this  memorable  phrase,  in  the  other  cases,  can 
denote  only  a  general  instrumentality ;  for  Paul  could 
not  introduce  truth  into  the  mind,  as  the  sticklers  for 
the  literal  meaning  of  this  figure  represent  God  as 
doing.  If  this  great  moral  change  is  called  a  new  birth, 
the  Gospel,  regarded  as  the  means  of  making  the  living, 
active  man,  may  well  enough  be  called  the  seed ;  but  the 
10* 


114  IMPORTANCE  AND  INSTRUMENTALITY 

resemblance  must  not  be  pressed  too  far.  By  another 
modification  of  this  general  figure  Paul  becomes  the  mother. 
"  My  little  children,  of  whom  I  travail  in  birth  again  until 
Christ  be  formed  in  you  ;"  referring  to  the  agony  of  prayer 
for  the  descent  of  the  Spirit  upon  them  ;  which  looks  like 
any  thing  but  a  generation  by  the  word  without  the  life 
giving  Spirit. 

How  regeneration  is  effected  by  light,  and  what  the 
meaning  is  of  all  those  passages  which  speak  of  this,  may 
be  gathered  from  a  single  text.  "  God,  who  commanded 
the  light  to  shine  out  of  darkness,  hath  shined  in  our  hearts, 
to  give  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God  in 
the  face  of  Jesus  Christ."*  After  all  then  it  is  a  new  crea- 
tion. 

In  the  days  of  the  apostles  there  was  an  unction  of  the 
Spirit  which  communicated  a  knowledge  of  the  truth ;  but 
it  was  the  Spirit  of  inspiration.! 

We  have  now  passed  regeneration.  When  we  come 
to  the  process  of  sanctification,  we  find  it  to  be  a  law  of  the 
new  creation  that,  while  the  Christian  is  gazing  intently 
upon  God  in  the  glass  of  his  word,  the  Spirit  takes  that 
occasion  to  transform  him  progressively  into  the  divine 
likeness.  And  by  the  same  figure  by  which  efl^ciency  is 
ascribed  to  light,  we  say  that  views  of  God  are  transform- 
ing. "  We  all  with  open  face  beholding  as  in  a  glass  the 
glory  of  the  Lord,  are  changed  into  the  same  image  from 
glory  to  glory,  even  as  bi/  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord."  "  Sanc- 
tify them  through  thy  truth ;  thy  word  is  truth. — For  their 
sakes  I  sanctify  myself,  that  they  also  might  be  sanctified 

*  2  Cor.  4.  G.        t  1  John  2.  20,  27. 


OF  TRUTH.  116 

through  the  truth."  But  this  very  prayer  for  sanctifying 
influence  was  made  to  God.  "  Christ — loved  the  Church 
and  gave  himself  for  it,  that  he  might  sanctify  and  cleanse 
it  with  the  washing  of  water  by  the  word ;"  the  word  being 
the  water  in  which  it  is  cleansed  by  the  divine  Purifier  ; 
or  literally,  the  word  furnishing  the  considerations  by  which 
the  holy  affections  are  called  forth  by  the  causal  influence 
of  the  Spirit  of  Christ.* 

There  are  several  texts  which  have  been  thought 
against  us,  which  have  no  such  bearing.  The  enjoined 
action  of  the  creature  is  so  exactly  in  a  line  with  the  action 
of  the  Spirit,  that  the  two  coincide  in  bringing  forth  the 
exercises  of  a  new  heart ;  one  causally,  the  other  actually. 
On  this  account  both  are  called  by  the  sartie  name.  Thus 
men  are  commanded  to  make  to  themselves  new  hearts  and 
to  circumcise  their  hearts ;  which  means  only  that  they 
must  cease  to  hate  and  begin  to  love.  If  Christians 
"  quench  not  the  Spirit,"  but  co-operate  with  the  Spirit, 
as  they  ought  to  do,  they  will  be  "  transformed  by  the 
renewing  of "  their  "  mind  ;  "  they  will  "be  renewed  in 
the  spirit  of"  their  "  mind ; "  they  will  "  stir  up  the  gift  of 
God  which  is  in  "  them ;  they  will  be  partakers  "  of  the 
afflictions  of  the  Gospel  according  to  the  power  of  God  ; " 
they  will  "be  strong  in  the  Lord  and  in  the  power  of  his 
might;"  they  will  pray  "in  the  Spirit;"  they  will  "be 
filled  with  the  Spirit ; "  they  will  "put  off"  the  old  man  with 
his  deeds,  and — put  on  the  new  man,  which  is  renewed  in 
knowledge  after  the  image  of  him  that  created  Mm" — 
"  which  after  God  is  created  in  righteousness  and  true 

*  John  17.  17,  19.    2  Cor.  3. 18.     Eph.  5.  25,  26. 


116  IMPORTANCE  AND  INSTRUMENTALITY,  &C. 

holiness."  And  therefore  all  these  things  are  command- 
ed.* 

In  some  of  these  instances  men  seem  commanded  to 
do  what  God  does  for  them, — to  be  renewed  in  the  spirit 
of  their  mind,  to  be  strengthened  by  his  power,  to  be  filled 
with  the  Spirit.  But  upon  every  plan  the  action  of  God 
and  the  action  of  believers  are  distinct.  Except  that  both 
actions,  as  coincident,  are  sometimes  called  by  the  same 
name,  the  whole  meaning  is,  that  they  must  avail  them- 
selves of  the  offered  aids  of  the  Spirit,  and  go  forward  in 
the  line  to  which  he  excites  them.  That  is  all :  and  in 
this  there  is  nothing  opposed  to  the  common  Calvinistic 
theory. 

I  have  now  gone  over  all  the  texts  that  I  could  find 
which  speak  of  the  instrumentality  of  the  word  in  rege- 
neration and  sanctification.  And  allowing  for  figures  of 
speech,  (for  the  most  part  slight  and  natural,)  they  cast 
no  decisive  light  on  the  mode  of  divine  operation,  and  in 
their  most  obvious  meaning  are  easily  reconcilable  with 
divine  efficiency,  Thus  far  then  there  is  nothing  disco- 
vered in  opposition  to  this  doctrine.  We  are  next  to  inquire 
what  there  is  in  the  Bible  which  positively  supports  it. 

*  Deut.  10.  16.  Jer.  4.  4.  Ezek.  18.  31,  32.  Rom.  12.  2.  Eph. 
4.  23,  24.  and  5.  18.  and  G.  10, 18.  Col.  3.9, 10.  1  Thes.  5.  19. 
1  Tim.  4.  14.    2  Tim.  1.  G,  8. 


CHAPTER    VII. 

Scripture  Testimony  to  Divine  Efficiency. 

After  all  our  reasonings  on  the  subject  of  divine 
efficiency,  our  chief  dependence  must  be  on  the  plain  tes- 
timony of  the  Bible.  We  can  argue  conclusively  against 
the  assumption  that  divine  efficiency  is  inconsistent  with 
freedom ;  but  for  positive  proof  of  the  doctrine  we  dare  not 
rely  on  our  own  independent  reasonings.  We  cannot 
look  so  deep  into  the  secrets  of  nature.  We  must  "  hear 
what  God  the  Lord  will  speak : "  and  if  he,  in  language 
the  most  plain  and  positive,  declares  the  fact,  we  must 
cast  no  doubts  upon  it  from  any  confidence  we  may  have 
in  our  own  powers  of  discernment,  or  from  any  apprehen- 
sion of  its  inconsistency  with  moral  agency.  Now  then 
for  the  divine  testimony. 

I.  The  general  language  of  Scripture  represents  God  to 
be  the  Author  of  holiness,  without  limiting  or  qualifying 
the  declaration  by  a  reference  to  any  instrument.  The 
general  current  of  Scripture  therefore  gives  the  same  evi- 
dence of  efficiency  in  the  second  creation,  that  the  first 
chapter  of  Genesis  does  of  efficiency  in  the  first.  "God 
said.  Let  there  be  light,  and  there  was  light."     We  ask 


118  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

no  questions  about  the  mode,  but  simply  believe  that  he 
willed  the  existence  of  light  and  light  was.  Exactly  the 
same  evidence  we  have,  not  from  a  single  chapter,  but 
from  the  general  tenour  of  Scripture,  that  God  efficiently 
wills  the  existence  of  holiness  in  the  hearts  of  his  people. 
And  the  few  texts  which  speak  of  truth  as  the  object 
towards  which  the  mind  acts,  or  as  the  consideration  by 
which  it  is  consciously  influenced,  do  not  touch  the  ques- 
tion. Who  causes  the  mind  to  fall  in  with  truth  7  This 
question,  which  is  settled  by 'the  general  voice  of  Scrip- 
ture, receives  no  opposing  answer  from  a  single  text. 

(1.)  I  sliall  begin  with  a  class  of  texts  which,  in  the 
simplest  form,  speak  of  God  as  the  Author  of  holiness. 
"  I  am  the  Lord  which  sanctify  you."  "  God  is  ray 
strength  and  power,  and  he  maketh  my  way  perfect." 
"  The  Lord  our  God  be  with  us  as  he  was  with  our 
fathers.  Let  him  not  leave  us  nor  forsake  us;  that  he 
may  incline  our  hearts  unto  him,  to  walk  in  all  his  ways, 
and  to  keep  his  commandments  and  his  statutes  and  his 
judgments,  as  he  commanded  our  fathers."  "  Thou  hast 
heard  the  desire  of  the  humble ;  thou  wilt  prepare  their 
heart."  "  The  Lord  will  give  grace  and  glory."  "The 
Lord  will  perfect  that  which  concerneth  me."  "  Thou 
wilt  ordain  peace  for  us,  for  thou  also  hast  wrought  all  our 
works  in  us."  "  I  hid  me  and  was  wroth,  and  he  went 
on  frowardly  in  the  way  of  his  heart.  I  have  seen  his 
ways  and  v  ill  heal  him.  I  will  lead  him  also  and  restore 
comforts  unto  him  and  to  his  mourners.  I  create  the  fruit 
of  the  lips  :  peace,  peace  to  him  that  is  far  off  and  to  him 
that  is  near,  saith  the  Lord,  and  I  will  heal  him."     "  That 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  119 

they  might  know  that  I  am  the  Lord  that  sanctify  them." 
"  The  heathen  shall  know  that  I  the  Lord  do  sanctify 
Israel."  "  He  is  like  a  refiner's  fire  and  like  fidler's  soap. 
And  he  shall  sit  as  a  refiner  and  purifier  of  silver ;  and 
he  shall  purify  the  sons  of  Levi,  and  purge  them  as  gold 
and  silver,  that  they  may  offer  unto  the  Lord  an  offering 
in  righteousness."  "  Blessed  art  thou,  Simon  Barjona,  for 
flesh  and  blood  hath  not  revealed  it  unto  thee,  but  my 
Father  which  is  in  heaven."  "Without  me  ye  can  do 
nothing."  "  A  man  can  receive  nothing  except  it  be  giv- 
en him  from  lieaven."  "  Him  hath  God  exalted  with  his 
right  hand  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour,  for  to  give  re- 
pentance to  Israel  and  forgiveness  of  sins."  "  Simeon 
hath  declared  how  God  at  the  first  did  visit  the  Gentiles, 
to  take  out  of  them  a  people  for  his  name."  "  A  certain 
woman  named  Lydia, — whose  heart  the  Lord  opened." 
"  Who  maketh  thee  to  differ  from  another  ?  and  what  hast 
thou  that  thou  didst  not  receive  ?  Now  if  thou  didst 
receive  it,  why  dost  thou  glory  as  if  thou  hadst  not  receiv- 
ed it  1 "  "  By  the  grace  of  God  I  am  what  I  am."  "  Not 
that  we  are  sufficient  of  ourselves  to  think  any  thing  as  of 
ourselves,  but  our  sufficiency  is  of  God."  "  Thanks  be  to 
God  which  put  the  same  earnest  care  into  the  heart  of 
Titus  for  you."  "  When  it  pleased  God,  who  separated 
me  from  my  mother's  womb, — to  reveal  his  Son  in  me." 
"  Now  the  God  of  peace  that  brought  again  from  the  dead 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, — make  you  perfect  in  every  good 
work  to  do  his  will,  working  in  you  that  which  is  well 
pleasing  in  his  sight."     "  Every  good  gifl  and  every  per- 


120  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

feet  gift  is  from  above,  and  cometh  down  from  the  Father 
of  lights."  "  Who — was  manifest  in  these  last  times  for 
you  who  hy  him  do  believe  in  God."* 

(2.)  The  great  account  made  of  the  Spirit  in  the 
Gospel  dispensation,  and  the  work  every  where  ascribed 
to  him. 

The  office  work  of  the  third  Person  in  the  Trinity  is  to 
sanctify.  Take  from  the  Spirit  that  work,  and  you  wrest 
from  him  all  employment,  and  cover  him  from  creatures 
with  an  eternal  cloud.  From  the  more  abundant  influ- 
ences of  the  Spirit  which  attend  the  Gospel,  compared 
with  the  law  of  Moses,  that  is  called  "  the  ministration  of 
the  Spirit,"  and  even  "  the  spirit."  This  w  as  a  chief 
good  promised  to  Christ  in  the  covenant  of  redemption, 
and  through  him  to  the  Church  in  the  covenant  of  grace. 
"  Christ  hath  redeemed  us  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  being 
made  a  curse  for  us ; — that  the  blessing  of  Abraham  might 
come  on  the  Gentiles  through  Jesus  Christ ;  that  we  might 
receive  the  promise  of  the  Spirit  through  faith. — Now  to 
Abraham  and  his  Seed  w^ere  the  promises  made.  He 
saith  not.  And  to  seeds,  as  of  many,  but  as  of  One,  And 
to  thy  Seed,  which  is  Christ."  '"  The  Redeemer  shall 
come  to  Zion. — This  is  my  covenant  with  them,  saith  the 
Lord :  My  Spirit  that  is  upon  thee  and  my  words  which  I 

•  Lev.  20.  8.  2  Sam.  22.  33.  1  Kin.  8.  57,  53.  Ps.  10.  17.  and 
84. 11.  and  138.  8.  Isai.  26.  12.  and  57.  17—19.  Ezck.  20.  12.  and 
37.  28.  Mai.  3.  2,  3.  Mat.  16.  17.  John  3.  27  and  15.  5.  Acts 
3.  31.  and  15.  14.  and  16.  14.  1  Cor.  4.  7.  and  15.  10.  2  Cor.  3. 
5.  and  8.  16.  Gal.  1.  1.5,  IG.  Heb.  13.  20,  21.  James  1.  17. 
I  Pet.  1.20,21. 


ro  DIVINE  EFiFICIENCY.  \'2.l 

have  put  in  thy  mouth,  shall  not  depart  out  of  thy  mouth, 
nor  out  of  the  mouth  of  thy  seed,  nor  out  of  the  mouth  of 
thy  seed's  seed,  saith  the  Lord,  from  henceforth^ and  for- 
ever." "And  it  shall  come  to  pass  afterward  that  I  will 
pour  out  my  Spirit  upon  all  flesh."  "And  I  w^ill  pour  upon 
the  house  of  David  and  upon  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem 
a  spirit  of  grace  and  of  supplications;  and  they  shall  look 
upon  me  whom  they  have  pierced,  and  they  shall  mourn 
for  him  as  one  mourneth  for  his  only  son."  "  I  will  pray 
the  Father  and  he  shall  give  you  another  Comforter,  that 
he  may  abide  with  you  forever. — The  Comforter,  which  is 
the  Holy  Ghost,  whom  the  Father  will  send  in  my  name." 
"When  the  Comforter  is  come — he  shall  testify  of  me." 
•'  When  he,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  is  come,  he  will  guide  you 
into  all  truth."  "  If  I  go  not  avv^ay  the  Comforter  will  not 
come  unto  you,  but  if  I  depart  I  will  send  him  unto  you." 
"  This  spoke  he  of  the  Spirit  which  they  that  believe  on 
him  should  receive  ;  for  the  Holy  Ghost  was  not  yet  given, 
because  that  Jesus  was  not  yet  glorified."  In  his  first 
.  interview  with  the  disciples  after  liis  resurrection,  "  he 
breathed  on  them  and  saith  unto  them,  Tleceive  ye  the 
Holy  Ghost."  "  He  showed  himself  alive  after  his  passion  : 
— and  being  assembled  together  with  them,  commanded 
them  that  they  should  not  depart  from  Jerusalem,  but  wait 
for  the  promise  of  the- Father,  which,  saith  he,  ye  have  heard 
of  me.  For  John  truly  baptised  with  water,  but  ye  shall  be 
baptised  with  the  Holy  Ghost  not  many  days  hence."* 

^  Isai.  59.  20,  21.  .Joel  2.  28,  29.  Zech.  12.  10.  John  7.  38, 39. 
and  14.  16,  17,  2G.  and  15.  26.  and  16.  7,  13.  and  20.  22.  Acts  1. 
3—5.    2Cor.  3.  6,  8.     Gal.  3.  13,  14,  16. 

11 


V22  SCRIPTURE  TESTI.MONV 

When  Christ  "  ascended  on  high  "  he  "  received  gifts 
for  men, — that  the  Lord  God  might  dwell  among  them." 
The  chief  of  these  was  the  holy  Spirit,  which  he  poured 
out  upon  his  disciples  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  To  show 
once  for  all  that  he  had  sent  down  this  Agent  to  dwell 
with  men  and  statedly  to  attend  the  Gospel,  he  imparted 
to  the  first  disciples  the  miraculous  powers  of  the  Spirit, 
and  thus  made  a  public  and  convincing  display  of  the  con- 
nexion of  the  Spirit  with  the  Gospel  and  with  the  Church. 
For  where  he  bestowed  miraculous  powers  he  generally 
exerted  sanctifying  grace  ;  and  the  former  operation  was 
such  an  evidence  of  the  latter,  that  the  apostles  considered 
it  a  sufficient  ground  for  baptism.  Thus  Peter  at  the 
house  of  Cornelius  :  "  Can  any  man  forbid  water  that 
these  should  not  be  baptised,  which  have  received  the  Holy 
Ghost  as  well  as  we  ? "  And  when  he  told  the  story  to 
the  synod  of  Jerusalem,  he  said,  "And  God,  which  know- 
eth  the  hearts,  bore  them  witness,  giving  them  the  Holy 
Ghost  even  as  he  did  unto  us  ;  and  put  no  difference  be- 
tween us  and  them,  purifying  their  hearts  by  faith."  This 
same  Peter,  standing  up  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  said, 
"  Therefore  being  by  the  right  hand  of  God  exalted,  and 
having  received  of  the  Father  the  promise  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  he  hath  shed  forth  this  which  ye  now  see  and  hear." 
At  another  time,  "  when  they  had  prayed  the  place  was 
shaken  where  they  were  all  assembled  together,  and  they 
were  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost."  On  the  converts  at 
Samaria  the  apostles  "  laid — their  hands, — and  they  re- 
ceived the  Holy  Ghost."  At  Damascus,  "Ananias — said. 
Brother  Saul,  the  Lord — hath  sent  me  that  thou  mightest 


TO  DIVINE   EFFICIENCV.  123 

receive  thy  sight  and  be  filled  with  the  Holy  Ghost."  At 
a  later  period  still,  "  the  churches  [had]  rest  throughout 
all  Judea  and  Galilee  and  Samaria,  and  were  edified,  and, 
walking  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord  and  in  the  comfort  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  were  multiplied."  At  Antioch  in  Pisidia, 
"  the  disciples  were  filled  with  joy  and  with  the  Holy 
Ghost."  "The  Holy  Ghost  came  on"  the  disciples  of 
Ephesus  "when  Paul  laid  his  hands  upon  them."* 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  sanctifying  Spirit  is  not  pre- 
sented as  one  standing  and  offering  truth  to  persuade, 
but  as  an  effusion,  sometimes  dissolving,  sometimes  re- 
freshing or  fructifying,  sometimes  cleansing,  sometimes 
baptising  and  consecrating.  "  1  have  poured  out  my 
Spirit  upon  the  house  of  Israel."  "  I  will  pour  water 
upon  him  that  is  thirsty  and  floods  upon  the  dry  ground  ; 
I  will  pour  my  Spirit  upon  thy  seed  and  my  blessing  upon 
thine  offspring."  "  The  palaces  shall  be  forsaken — until 
the  Spirit  be  poured  upon  us  from  on  high  and  the  wilder- 
ness be  a  fruitful  field."  "  According  to  his  mercy  he 
saved  us  by  the  washing  of  regeneration  and  renewing  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  which  he  shed  on  us  abundantly  through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Saviour."  "  I  indeed  have  baptised  you 
with  water,  but  he  shall  baptise  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost." 
"  For  by  one  Spirit  are  we  all  baptised  into  one  body, — 
and  have  been  all  made  to  drink  into  one  Spirit."  vSome- 
times  the  Spirit  is  the  oil  that  feeds  the  perpetual  lamps. 
"  And   he  said  unto  me,  What  seest  thou?     And  I  said, 

*  Ps.  C8.  18.  Acts  2.  1—4,  33.  and  4.  31.  and  8. 15—17.  and  9   17. 
31.  and  13.  52.  and  15.  8.  9.  and  19.  2^6 


124  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

1  have  looked  and  behold  a  candlestick  all  of  gold,  with 
a  bowl  upon  the  top  of  it,  and  his  seven  lamps  thereon, 
and  seven  pipes  to  the  seven  lamps  which  were  upon  the 
top  thereof;  and  two  olive  trees  by  it,  one  upon  the  right 
side  of  the  bowl  and  the  other  upon  the  left  side  thereof. — 
Then  he  answered  and  spoke  unto  me,  saying,  This  is 
the  word  of  the  Lord  unto  Zerubbabel,  saying.  Not  hy 
might  nor  by  poioer,  hut  by  my  Spirit,  saith  the  Lord  of 
hosts."* 

This  is  the  general  account.  Come  now  to  something 
a  little  more  particular.  "  Cast  me  not  away  from  thy 
presence,  and  take  not  thy  holy  Spirit  from  me.  Restore 
unto  me  the  joy  of  thy  salvation  and  uphold  me  with  thy 
free  Spirit."  "  When  the  enemy  shall  come  in  like  a 
flood,  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  shall  lift  up  a  standard  against 
him."  "  Where  is  he  that  brought  them  up  out  of  the  sea 
with  the  shepherd  of  his  flock  1  Where  is  he  that  put  his 
holy  Spirit  within  him  ?"  "  According  to  the  word  that  I 
covenanted  with  you  when  ye  came  out  of  Egypt,  so  my 
Spirit  remaineth  among  you."  "  If  ye  then,  being  evil, 
know  how  to  give  good  gifts  unto  your  children,  how  much 
more  shall  your  heavenly  Father  give  the  holy  Spirit  to 
them  that  ask  him."  "  It  is  the  Spirit  that  quickeneth, 
the  flesh  profiteth  nothing."  "  Hope  maketh  not  ashamed, 
because  the  love  of  God  is  shed  abroad  in  our  hearts  by 
the  Holy  Ghost  which  is  given  unto  us."  "For  they  that 
are  after  the  flesh  do  mind  the  things  of  the  flesh,  but  they 

*  Isai.  32.  14,  15.  and  44.  3.     Ezek.  39.  2P.      Zech.  4.  2— G. 
Mar.  1.8.     1  Cor.  12.  13.     Tit.  3.  5.  6. 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY  l''^" 

-that  are  after  the  Spirit,  the  things  of  the  Spirit.      For  to 
be  carnally  minded  is  death,  but  to  be  spiritually  minded 
is  life  and  peace.— For  if  ye  live  after  the  flesh  ye  shall 
die ;  but  if  ye,  through  the  Spirit,  do  mortify  the  deeds  of 
the  body,  ye  shall  live.     For  as  many  as  are  led  by  the 
Spirit  of  God,  they  are  the  sons  of  God.     For  ye  have  not 
received  the  spirit  of  bondage  again  to  fear,  but  ye  have 
received  the  Spirit  of  adoption,  whereby  we  cry,  Abba, 
Father.     The  Spirit  itself  beareth  witness  with  our-  spirit 
that  we  are  the  children  of  God.— Ourselves  also  which 
have  the  first  fruits  of  the  Spirit,  even  we  ourselves  groan 
within  ourselves.— The  Spirit  also  helpeth  our  infirmities : 
for  we  know   not  what  we  should  pray  for   as  we  ought  ; 
but  the  Spirit  itself  maketh  intercession  for  us  with  groan- 
ings  which  cannot  be  uttered.      And  he  that  searcheth 
the  hearts  knoweth  what  is  the  mind  of  the  Spirit,  because 
he  maketh  intercession  for  the  saints  according  to  the  will 
of  God."     Is'this  the  Spirit  merely  suggesting  truth,  and 
not  eifectually  awakening  desires  1     "My  conscience  also 
bearing  me  witness  in  the  Holy  Ghost."     "  The  kingdom 
of  God  is  not  meat  and  drink,  but  righteousness  and  peace 
and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost."     "  The  natural  man  recen-  j 
eth  not  the  things  of  the  Spirit  of  God,  for  they  are  fool-  ' 
ishness  unto  him  ;    neither  can  he  know  them  because 
they   are  spiritually  discerned.      But  he  that  is  spiritual 
judgeth  all  things."     "  Now  the  God  of  hope  fill  you  with 
all  joy  and  peace  in  believing,  that  ye  may  abound  in  hope 
through  the  power  of  the  Holy  Ghost."     "  And  such  were 
some  of  you ;    but  ye  are  washed,  but  ye  are  sanctified, 
but  ye  are  justified  in  the  name  of  tlie  Lord  Jesus  and  by 
11* 


126  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

the  Spirit  of  our  God."     "  Now  he  which  stabUsheth  U8 
with  you   in    Christ,  and   hath    anointed    us,  is   God,  who 
hath  also  sealed   us  and  given  the  earnest  of  the  Spirit  in 
our  hearts."     "  Forasmuch  as  ye  are  manifestly  declared 
to  be  the  epistle  of  Christ  ministered  by  us,  written,  not 
with   ink,  but  with  the  Spirit  of  the  living  God,  not  in 
tables  of  stone,  but  in  fleshy  tables  of  the  heart."     Does 
this  look  like  mere  persuasion  1     "  Now  the  Lord  is  that 
Spirit :    and  where  the  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is,  there  is  li- 
berty."   "  He  that  hath  wrought  us  for  the  self-same  thing 
is  God,  who  also  hath  given  unto  us  the  earnest  of  the 
Spirit."     "  The  grace  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  the 
love  of  God,  and  the  communion  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  be 
with  you  all."      "  Because  ye  are  sons,  God   hath  sent 
forth  the  Spirit  of  his  Son  into  your  hearts,  crying,  Abba, 
Father."      "  We,  through  the  Spirit,  wait  for  the  hope  of 
righteousness   by  faith."     "Walk   in  the  Spirit,   and   ye 
shall  not  fulfil  the  lust  of  the  flesh.     For  the  flesh  lusteth 
against  the  Spirit  and  the  Spirit  against  the  flesh  ;  and 
these  are  contrary  the  one  to  the  other. — But  if  yc  be  led 
by  the  Spirit  ye  are  not  under  law. — The  fruit  of  the  Spi- 
rit is  love,  joy,  peace,  long  sutTerini,  gentleness,  goodness, 
faith,  meekness,  temperance. — If  we  live  in  the  Spirit   let 
us  also  walk  in  the  Spirit."     "  In  whom  also  after  that  ye 
believed,  ye  were  sealed  with  that  holy  Spirit  of  promise 
which  is  the  earnest  of  our  inlieritance."     "Through  him 
we  both  have  an  access,  by  one  Spirit,  unto  the  Father." 
"  Grieve  not  the  holy  Spirit  of  God,  whereby  ye  are  sealed 
unto  the  day  of  redemption."     "  The  fruit  of  the  Spirit  is 
in  all  goodness  and  righteousness  and  truth."     "  Praying 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCV.  127 

always  with  all  prayer  and  supplication  in  the  Spirit." 
"  He  therefore  that  despiseth,  despiseth  not  man  but  God, 
who  hath  also  given  unto  us  his  holy  Spirit."  "  Quench 
not  the  Spirit."  "  That  good  thing  which  was  committed 
unto  thee,  keep  by  the  Holy  Ghost  that  dwelleth  in  us." 
"  Seeing  ye  have  purified  your  souls  in  obeying  the  truth 
through  the  Spirit."  "  If  ye  be  reproached  for  the  name 
of  Christ  happy  are  ye,  for  the  Spirit  of  glory  and  of  God 
resteth  upon  you."  "  These  be  they  who  separate  thenv 
.•3elves,  sensual,  having  not  the  Spirit.  But  ye,  beloved, 
— praying  in  the  Holy  Ghost,  keep  yourselves  in  the  love 
of  God."* 

(3.)  Faith,  (the  condition  of  salvation,)  and  holiness 
generally,  instead  of  being  independent  acts  of  the  crea- 
ture under  the  persuasions  of  the  Spirit,  are  the  gift  of 
God.  "  For  I  say,  through  the  grace  given  unto  me,  to 
every  man  that  is  among  you,  not  to  think  of  himself  more 
highly  than  he  ought  to  tliink,  but  to  think  soberly,  accord- 
ing as  God  hath  dealt  to  every  man  the  measure  of  faith." 
"  According  to  the  grace  of  God  which  is  given  unto  me, 
as  a  wise  master  builder  I  have  laid  the  foundation." 
"  Every  man  hath  his  proper  gift  of  God,  one  after  this 
manner  and  another  after  that."     "  When  James,  Cephas, 

•i^'Ps.  51.  11,  12.  Isai.  o9.  ID.  and  G3.  11.  Hag.  2.  5.  Luke 
11.  13.  John  6.  63.  Rom.  5.  5.  and  8.  5,  6,  13— IC,  23,  26,  27 
and9.  Land  14.  17.  and- 15.  13.  1  Cor.  2. 14, 15.  and  6.  11.  2Cor 
1.  21,  22.  and  3.  3,  17.  and  5.  5.  and  13.  14.,  Gal.  4.  6.  and  5.  5 
16—18,  22,  23, 2."j.  Eph.  1.  13,  14.  and  2.  18.  and  4.  30.  and  5.  9 
and  6.  18.  1  Thes.  4.  8.  and  5.  19.  2  Tim.  1 .  14.  I  Pet.  1.  22 
and  4. 14.     Jude  19,20. 


128  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONV 

;ind  Jolin — perceived  the  grace  that  was  given  unto  me." 
"  By  grace  are  ye  saved,  through  faith  ;  and  that  not  of 
yourselves,  it  is  the  gift  of  God."  "  Unto  you  it  is  given 
in  behalf  of  Christ,  not  only  to  believe  on  him,  but  also  to 
suffer  for  his  sake."  "Looking  unto  Jesus,  the  author 
and  finisher  of  our  faith."  "  By  the  grace  of  God  I  am 
what  I  am  :  and  his  grace  which  was  bestowed  upon  me 
was  not  in  vain,  but  I  laboured  more  abundantly  than  they 
all ;  yet  not  I,  but  the  grace  of  God  which  was  with  me." 
"  There  are  diversities  of  operations,  but  it  is  the  same 
God  Avhich  worketh  all  in  all. — For  to  one  is  given  by  the 
Spirit  the  word  of  wisdom, — to  another  faith  by  the  same 
Spirit. — But  all  these  worketh  that  one  and  the  self  same 
Spirit."  "  Unto  every  one  is  given  grace  according  to  the 
measure  of  the  gift  of  Christ."* 

(4.)  God  is  every  where  represented,  not  as  our  per- 
suader, but  as  our  essential  moral  strength.  "  The  Lord 
is  my  strength  and  song,  and  he  is  become  my  salva- 
tion." "  I  will  love  thee,  O  Lord  my  strength.  The  Lord 
is  my  rock  and  my  fortress  and  my  deliverer  ;  my  God,  my 
strength,  in  whom  I  will  trust. — It  is  God  that  girdeth  me 
with  strength  and  maketh  my  way  perfect."  "Let  the 
words  of  my  mouth  and  the  meditation  of  my  heart  be 
acceptable  in  thy  sight,  O  Lord,  my  strength  and  my  Re- 
deemer." "Wait  on  the  Lord,  be  of  good  courage,  and 
he  shall  strengthen  thy  heart:  w'ait,  I  say,  on  the  Lord." 
"  The  Lord  is  my  strength  and  my  shield  :  my  heart  trusted 
in  him  and  I  am  helped."  .  "  Be  of  good  courage  and  he 

'  Rom.  12.  3.     1  Cor.  3.  10.  and  7.  7.  and  12.  G,  8,  9,  11.  and  15. 
10.     Gal.  2.  9.     Eph.2.  8.  and4.7.     Phil.  1.29.     Hcb.  12.  2. 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  129 

shall  strengthen  your  heart,  all  ye  that  hope  in  the  Lord." 
"  I  will  go  in  the  strength  of  the  Lord  God."  "  My  flesh 
and  my  heart  faileth,  but  God  is  the  strength  of  my  heart 
and  ray  portion  forever."  "  Sing  aloud  unto  God  our 
strength."  "  Blessed  is  the  man  whose  strength  is  in 
thee."  "  The  Lord  is  my  strength  and  song,  and  is  be- 
come my  salvation."  "  My  soul  melteth  for  heaviness  ; 
strengthen  thou  me  according  unto  thy  word."  "  In  the 
day  when  I  cried  thou  answeredest  me  and  strengthenedst 
me  with  strength  in  my  soul."  "  My  soul,  wait  thou  only 
upon  God  ;  for  my  expectation  is  from  him."  "  God  is  my 
salvation,  I  will  trust  and  not  be  afraid  ;  for  the  Lord  Jeho- 
vah is  my  strength  and  my  song;  he  also  is  become 
my  salvation."  "  Trust  ye  in  the  Lord  forever,  for  in  the 
Lord  Jehovah  is  everlasting  strength."  "  Let  him  take 
hold  of  my  strength  that  he  may  make  peace  with  me,  and 
he  shall  make  peace  with  me."  "  He  giveth  power  to  the 
faint,  and  to  them  that  have  no  might  he  increaseth 
strength.  Even  the  youths  shall  faint  and  be  weary,  and 
the  young  men  shall  utterly  fall ;  but  they  that  wait  upon 
the  Lord  shall  renew  their  strength  :  they  shall  mount  up 
with  wings  as  eagles  ;  they  shall  run  and  not  be  weary, 
and  they  shall  walk  and  not  faint."  "  Fear  thou  not,  for 
I  am  with  thee ;  be  not  dismayed,  for  I  am  thy  God.  I 
will  strengthen  thee ;  yea  I  will  help  thee ;  yea  I  will  up- 
hold thee  with  the  right  hand  of  my  righteousness." 
"  Surely,  (shall  one  say,)  in  the  Lord  have  I  righteousness 
and  strength."  "  The  Lord  God  is  my  strength,  and  he 
will  make  my  feet  like  hinds'  feet,  and  he  will  make  me  to 


130  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

walk  upon  my  high  places."  "  I  will  strengthen  them  in 
the  Lord,  and  they  shall  walk  up  and  down  in  his  name, 
saith  the  Lord."  "I  can  do  all  things  through  Christ 
which  strengtheneth  me."* 

More  indeed  is  sometimes  meant  by  God's  being  our 
strength,  than  that  he  imparts  moral  power.  Protection  is 
sometimes  implied,  and  sometimes  liis  general  agency  in 
delivering  us  from  eternal  death.  But  the  other  is  the 
principal  idea. 

(5.)  God  foretells  holiness,  not  as  the  foreseen  result  of 
the  self-determining  power  under  circumstances  arranged 
by  him,  but  as  a  thing  which  he  himself  would  produce. 
"  And  they  that  escape  of  you  shall  remember  me  among 
the  nations  whither  they  shall  be  carried  captives  ; — and 
tliey  shall  loathe  themselves  for  the  evils  which  they  have 
committed  in  all  their  abominations ;  and  they  shall  know 
tliat  I  am  the  Lord."  "  I  will  remember  my  covenant  with 
thee  in  the  days  of  thy  youth. — Then  thou  shalt  remember 
thy  ways  and  be  ashamed. — And  I  will  establish  my  cove- 
nant with  thee,  and  thou  shalt  know  that  I  am  the  Lord ; 
that  thou  mayst  remember  and  be  confounded,  and  never 
open  thy  mouth  any  more  because  of  thy  shame  when  I 
am  pacified  towards  thee  for  all  that  thou  hast  done,  saith 
the  Lord  God."      "  And  there  shall  ye  remember  your 

"  Exod.  15.  2.  Ps.  18.  1,  2,  32.  and  19.  14.  and  27.  14.  and  28. 
7.  and  31.  24.  and  G2.  5.  and  71.  16.  and  73.  26.  and  81.  1.  and  84. 
5.  and  118.  14.  and  119.  28.  and  138.  3.  Isai.  12.  2.  and  26.  4.  and 
27.  5.  and  40.  29—31.  and  41.  10.  and  45.  24.  Hab.  3.  19.  Zech, 
10.12.     Phil.  4.  13. 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  131 

ways  and  all  your  doings  wherein  ye  have  been  defiled  ; 
and  ye  shall  loathe  yourselves  in  your  own  sight  for  all 
your  evils  that  ye  have  committed.  And  ye  shall  know 
that  I  am  the  Lord  when  I  have  wrought  with  you  for  my 
name's  sake,  not  according  to  your  Avicked  ways  nor  ac- 
cording to  your  corrupt  doings,  O  house  of  Israel,  saith 
the  Lord  God."* 

(6.)  The  people  of  God,  by  his  directions,  have  always 
prayed  to  him,  not  to  persuade  them,  but  to  make  them 
holy.  "  O  Lord  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  of  Israel, 
our  fathers,  keep  this  forever  in  the  imagination  of  the 
thoughts  of  the  heart  of  thy  people,  and  prepare  their 
heart  unto  thee.  And  give  unto  Solomon  my  son  a  per- 
fect heart  to  keep  thy  commandments,  thy  testimonies, 
and  thy  statutes."  "Q,uicken  us  and  we  will  call  upon 
thy  name.  Turn  us  again,  O  Lord  God  of  hosts, — and 
we  shall  be  saved."  "  Wilt  thou  not  revive  us  again,  that 
thy  people  may  rejoice  in  thee  V  "  Unite  my  heart  to 
fear  thy  name."  "  Let  the  beauty  of  the  Lord  our  God 
be  upon  us."  What  this  means,  God  himself  has  told  us. 
"  Thy  renown  went  forth  among  the  heathen  for  thy 
beauty  ;  for  it  was  perfect  through  my  comeliness  which  I 
had  put  upon  thee,  saith  the  Lord  God."  "  O  that  my 
ways  were  directed  to  keep  thy  statutes. — My  soul  cleav- 
eth  unto  the  dust ;  quicken  thou  me  according  to  thy 
word. — I  will  run  in  the  way  of  thy  commandments  when 
thou  shalt  enlarge  my  heart. — Incline  ray  heart  unto  thy 
testimonies,  and  not  to  covetousness.     Turn  away  my  eyes 

*  Ezek.  6.  0,  10.  and  16.  CO— G3.  and  20.  43.  44. 


1 3*2  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

from  beholding  vanity  and  quicken  thou  me  in  thy  way. — 
I  have  longed  after  thy  precepts,  quicken  me  in  thy  right- 
eousness.— Let  my  heart  be  found  in  thy  statutes,  that  I 
be  not  ashamed. — Q.uicken  me  after  thy  loving  kindness, 
so  shall  I  keep  the  testimony  of  thy  mouth. — I  am  afflicted 
very  much  ;  quicken  me,  O  Lord,  according  unto  thy 
word. — Plead  my  cause  and  deliver  me  :  quicken  me 
according  to  thy  word. — Consider  how  I  love  thy  precepts ; 
quicken  me,  O  Lord,  according  to  thy  loving  kindness. — 
Cluicken  me  accorcing  to  thy  judgments. — Hear  my  voice 
according  unto  thy  loving  kindness  :  O  Lord,  quicken  me 
according  to  thy  judgment."  ^'  Quicken  me,  O  Lord,  tor 
thy  name's  sake."  "  Incline  not  my  heart  to  any  evil 
thing."  "  Turn  thou  me  and  I  shall  be  turned."  "  O 
Lord,  revive  thy  work  in  the  midst  of  the  years ;  in  the 
midst  of  the  years  make  known  :  in  wrath  remember 
mercy."  "  Peace  be  to  the  brethren,  and  love  with  faith 
from  God  the  Father  and  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  "'  And 
this  I  pray,  that  your  love  may  abound  yet  more  and  more 
in  knowledge  and  in  all  judgment ;  that  ye  may  approve 
tiiiugs  that  are  excellent ;  that  ye  may  be  sincere,  and 
without  offence  till  the  day  of  Christ ;  being  filled  with  the 
fruits  of  righteousness  which  are  by  Jesus  Christ."  '  The 
Lord  make  you  to  increase  and  abound  in  love  one  toward 
another  and  towards  all  men  ; — to  the  end  he  may  stablish 
your  hearts  unblamable  in  holiness."  "  Now  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  himself,  and  God  even  our  Father, — stablish 
you  in  every  good  word  and  work."  "  The  Lord  direct 
your  hearts  into  tlie  love  of  God  and  into  the  patient  wait- 


TO  DIVINE   EFFICIENCY.  133 

ing  for  Christ."  "  The  God  of  all  grace — make  you  per- 
fect, stablish,  strengthen,  settle  you."* 

Thus,  under  these  six  divisions,  you  see  how  the  gene- 
ral tenour  of  Scripture,  in  its  most  simple  form,  supports 
the  doctrine  that  God  is  the  Author  of  holiness,  and  that, 
without  the  slightest  allusion  to  any  instrumentality  of  the 
word,  and  with  no  more  reference  to  the  mode  of  opera- 
tion than  we  find  in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis.  .  Such  a 
flood  of  testimony  cannot  be  set  aside  or  explained  away 
by  a  few  texts  which  speak  of  an  instrumentality  no  wise 
inconsistent  with  divine  efficiency.  But  this  is  only  the 
first  head.     I  proceed  to  more  special  testimony. 

II.  The  Spirit,  so  far  from  standing  without  and  send- 
ing in  truth  like  another  pleader,  is  represented  as  dwell- 
ing in  the  heart  as  a  habitation  or  as  the  seat  of  empire. 
"  Ye  are  not  in  the  flesh  but  in  the  spirit,  if  so  be  that  the 
Spirit  of  God  dwell  in  you.  Now  if  any  man  have  not 
the  Spirit  of  Christ  he  is  none  of  his.  And  if  Christ  be 
in  you,  the  body  is  dead  because  of  sin,  but  the  spirit  is 
life  because  of  righteousness.  But  if  the  Spirit  of  him  that 
raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dead  dwell  in  you  ;  he  that  raised 
up  Christ  from  the  dead  shall  also  quicken  your  mortal 
bodies  by  his  Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  you."  "  Know  ye 
not  that  ye  are  the  temple  of  God,  and  that  the  Spirit  of 
(jod  dwelleth  in  you  ?      If  any  man  defile  the  temple  of 

'  I  Chron.  29.  IS,  19.  Ps.  60.  18,  19.  and  85.  G.  and  8G.  11 .  and 
90.  17.  and  119.  5,  2.5,  32, 30,  37,  40,  SO,  88,  107,  149,  154, 15G,  1.59. 
and  141.  4.  and  143.  12,  13.  Jer.  31.  18.  Ezek.  IG.  14.  Hab.  3.  2. 
Eph.  6.  23,  Phil.  1.  9—11.  1  Thes.  3.  12,  13.  2  Thes.  2.  IC, 
17 .  and  3.  5.     1  Pet.  5.  10. 

12 


134  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

God,  him  shall  God  destroy  :  for  the  temple  of  God  is  holy, 
which  temple  ye  are."  "  Know  ye  not  that  your  body  is 
the  temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost  which  is  in  you  1"  "  What 
agreement  hath  the  temple  of  God  with  idols  ?  for  ye  are 
the  temple  of  the  living  God  ;  as  God  hath  said,  I  will 
dwell  in  them  and  walk  in  them."  "  In  whom  all  the 
building,  fitly  framed  together,  groweth  unto  a  holy  tem- 
ple in  the  Lord  ;  in  whom  you  also  are  builded  together 
for  a  habitation  of  God  through  the  Spirit."  "  Christ  as 
a  Son  over  his  own  house  ;  whose  house  are  we."  "Ye 
also  as  living  stones  are  built  up  a  spiritual  house."  "  He 
that  keepeth  his  commandments  dwelleth  in  him  and  he 
in  him  :  and  hereby  we  know  that  he  abideth  in  us,  b\ 
the  Spirit  which  he  hath  given  us."  "  Greater  is  he  that 
is  in  you  than  he  that  is  in  the  world. — Hereby  know  we 
that  we  dwell  in  him  and  he  in  us,  because  he  hath  given 
us  of  his  Spirit. — Whosoever  shall  confess  that  Jesus  is 
the  Son  of  God,  God  dwelleth  in  him  and  he  in  God.'  * 

III.  Instead  of  merely  persuading  men  to  be  good. 
God  positively  declares  that  he  will  take  away  the  bad 
heart  and  put  a  good  one  in  its  stead.  "  Then  will  1 
sprinkle  clean  water  upon  you  and  ye  shall  be  clean  : 
from  all  your  filthiness  and  from  all  your  idols  will  I 
cleanse  you.  A  new  heart  also  will  I  give  you,  and  a 
new  spirit  will  I  put  within  you :  and  I  will  take  away 
the  stony  heart  out  of  your  flesh  and  I  will  give  you  a 
heart  of  flesh.     And  I  will  put  my  Spirit  within  you  and 

*  Rom.  8.  9—11.  1  Cor.  3.  16,  17.  and  G.  19.  2  Cor.  6.  Hi. 
Eph.  2.  21,  22.  •  Heb.  3.  6.  1  Pet.  2.  5.  1  John  3.  24.  and  4.  4, 
13,  15. 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  135 

cause  you  to  walk  in  my  statutes,  and  ye  shall  keep  my 
judgments  and  do  them. — I  will  also  save  you  from  all 
your  uncleannesses."  "  And  I  will  give  them  a  heart  to 
know  me,  that  I  am  the  Lord  ;  and  they  shall  be  my  peo- 
ple and  I  toill  be  their  God ;  for  they  shall  return  unto  me 
ivith  their  whole  heart."* 

And  in  the  most  express  manner  we  are  told  that  God's 
efficiency  in  giving  a  good  heart  does  not  prevent  blame 
for  exercising  a  bad  heart.  "  I  will  give  them  one  heart, 
and  I  will  put  a  new  spirit  within  you  ;  and  I  will  take 
the  stony  heart  out  of  their  flesh  and  will  give  them  a 
heart  of  flesh  ;  that  they  may  walk  in  my  statutes  and  keep 
my  ordinances  and  do  them  :  and  they  shall  be  my  people 
and  I  will  be  their  God.  Btit  as  for  them  whose  heart 
walJceth  after  the  heart  of  their  detestable  things  and  their 
abominations,  I  tvill  recompense  their  way  upon  their  own 
heads,  saith  the  Lord  God."f 

On  the  supposition  of  merely  inducing,  without  an  ab- 
solute control  by  motives,  the  work  of  God  differs  from 
that  of  Satan  only  as  the  motives  are  different  and  his  skill 
is  greater.  Both  persuade  and  do  no  more.  But  it  is  no 
where  said  that  Satan  takes  away  a  good  heart  and  gives 
a  bad  one  ;  but  merely  that  he  puts  evil  thoughts  "  into 
the  heart,"  as  in  the  case  of  Judas.| 

IV.  God  not  only  claims  to  make  the  heart  new,  but 
by  absolute  covenant  engages  to  do  it,  and  even  inserts 
that  promise  among  the  essential  stipulations  of  the  cove- 
nant of  grace.      "  Behold  the  days  come,  saith  the  Lord, 

"  Jer.  24,  7.   Ezek.  36.25—29.    t  Ezek.  11.  19—21.  I  John  13.  2. 


I'i6  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

that  J  will  make  a  jicw  covenant  with  the  house  of  Israel 
and  with  the  house  of  Judah :  not  according  to  the  cove- 
nant that  1  made  with  their  fathers  in  the  day  that  1  took 
them  by  the  hand  to  bring  them  out  of  the  land  of  Egypt : 
(which  my  covenant  tliey  brake,  although  I  was  a  husband 
unto  them,  saith  the  Lord  :)  but  this  shall  be  the  covenant 
that  I  will  make  with  the  house  of  Israel :  After  those 
days,  saith  the  Lord,  I  will  put  my  Jaw  in  their  inward 
parts  and  write  it  in  their  hearts,  and  will  be  their  God 
and  they  shall  be  my  people.  And  they  shall  teach  no 
more  every  man  his  neighboiu'  and  every  man  his  brother, 
saying.  Know  ye  the  Lord  :  for  they  shall  all  know  me 
from  the  least  of  them  unto  the  greatest  of  them,  saith  the 
Lord."* 

After  these  covenant  stipulations  of  what  God  himself 
would  do,  shall  it  be  said  that  every  thing  is  left  to  the 
casual  decisions  of  the  self-determining  power,  certain 
only  as  they  are  foreseen  by  God  ? 

V.  This  independent  potency  of  the  will  is  flatly  con- 
tradicted. "  Which  were  born,  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the 
will  of  the  flesh,  /?o?'  of  the  will  of  man,  but  of  God.""  "  So 
then  it  i^  not  of  him  that  willeth,  nor  of  him  that  runneth, 
but  of  God  that  showeth  mercy. "f 

VI.  Nor  is  this  dependence  on  divine  efficiency  any 
discouragement,  but  the  only  encouragement  we  have  to 
hope  for  success.  "  Work  out  your  own  salvation  with 
fear  and  trembling  ;  for  it  is  God  which  worketh  in  you 
both  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good  pleasure. "J 

-Jer.  31.  31-34      tJohnl.  13.      Rom.  9.  16      t  Phil.  2.  12,  13 


TO  DIVINE   EFFICIENCY.  137 

VII.  It  ill  comports  with  the  theory  of  persuasion  that 
moral  inability  is  ascribed  to  the  sinner.  To  say  to  a 
man,  You  have  so  strong  an  inclination  to  go,  that  you 
cannot  stop  unless  I  persuade  you,  would  certainly  be  a 
very  unusual  mode  of  address.  But  moral  inability  is  as- 
cribed to  the  sinner.  "  A  deceived  heart  hath  turned 
him  aside,  that  he  cannot  deliver  his  soul  nor  say,  Is  there 
not  a  lie  in  my  right  hand  ?"  "  Can  the  Ethiopian  change 
his  skin  or  the  leopard  his  spots  ?  then  may  ye  also  do 
good  that  are  accustomed  to  do  evil."  "No  man  can 
come  to  me  except  the  Father  which  hath  sent  me  draw 
him. — Therefore  said  I  unto  you,  that  no  man  can  come 
unto  me  except  it  were  given  unto  him  of  my  Father."* 
Dr  Fitch  says  that  to  draw  means  here  to  induce  :  but  as 
though  this  parrying  interpretation  was  foreseen,  it  is 
added  as  a  parallel  expression,  "  except  it  were  given  unto 
him  of  my  Father." 

VIII.  The  opposite  theory  is,  that  God  merely  presents 
inducements  which  some  yield  to  and  others  reject.  Now 
in  such  an  attempt  at  persuasion  how  can  there  be  any 
great  exhibition  of  power  ?  This  theory  then  is  flatly 
contradicted  by  all  those  texts  which  speak  of  regenera- 
tion and  sanctification  as  displays  of  mighty  power. 
"  Thy  people  shall  be  willing  in  the  day  of  thy  power." 
"  That  the  offering  up  of  the  Gentiles  might  be  accepta- 
ble, being  sanctified  by  the  Holy  Ghost,— through  mighty 
signs  and  wonders,  by  the  power  of  the  Spirit  of  God." 
*'  My  preaching  was  not  with  enticing  words  of  man's 
wisdom,  but  in  demonstration  of  the  Spirit  and  of  power ; 

*  Isai.  44.  20.     Jer.  13.  23.     John  6.  44,  65. 

12* 


138  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

that  your  faith  should  not  stand  in  the  wisdom  of  men  but 
in  the  power  of  God."  "  We  have  this  treasure  in  earth- 
ern  vessels,  that  the  excellency  of  the  power  may  be  of 
God  and  not  of  us."  "  For  he  that  wrought  effectually  in 
Peter  to  the  apostleship  of  the  circumcision,  the  same  was 
mighty  in  me  towards  the  Gentiles."  "  Whereof  I  was 
made  a  minister,  according  to  the  gift  of  the  grace  of  God 
given  unto  me  by  the  effectual  working  of  his  power. — 
Wherefore  I  desire — that  he  would  grant  you,  according 
to  the  riches  of  his  glory,  to  be  strengthened  with  might 
by  his  Spirit  in  the  inner  man  ;  that  Christ  may  dwell  in 
your  hearts  by  faith. — Now  unto  him  that  is  able  to  do 
exceeding  abundantly  above  all  that  we  ask  or  think,  ac- 
cording to  the  power  that  worketh  in  us  ;  unto  him  be 
glory  in  the  Church  by  Jesus  Christ — world  without  end.'" 
'*  That  I  may  know  him  and  the  power  of  his  resurrec- 
tion." "Strengthened  with  all  might  according  to  his 
glorious  power. — Giving  thanks  unto  the  Father  which 
hath  made  us  meet  to  be  partakers  of  the  inheritance  of 
the  saints  in  light ;  who  hath  delivered  us  from  the  power 
of  darkness  and  hath  translated  us  into  the  kingdom  of 
his  dear  ^on. — Whereunto  I  also  labour,  striving  accord- 
ing to  his  working  which  worketh  in  me  mightily."  "  For 
our  Gospel  came  not  unto  you  in  word  only,  but  also  in 
power  and  in  the  Holy  Ghost. — And  ye  became  followers 
of  us, — having  received  the  word — with  joy  of  the  Holy 
Ghost."  "  The  eyes  of  your  understanding  being  enlight- 
ened, that  ye  may  know — what  is  the  exceeding  greatness 
of  his  power  to  us-ward  who  believe,  according  to  the 
working  of  his  mighty  power  which  he  wrought  in  Christ 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  139 

when  he  raised  him  from  the  dead  and  set  him  at  his  own 
right  hand  in  the  heavenly  places."*  If  there  was  no 
other  text  in  the  Bible  against  the  theory  of  powerless 
persuasion,  this  would  be  enough.  How  could  a  bare 
suggestion  of  motives  be  "  the  exceeding  greatness  of  his 
power,"  and  "  according  to  the  working  of  his  mighty 
power"  in  the  resurrection  and  exaltation  of  Christ  ? 

IX.  The  different  names  by  which  this  great  moral 
change  is  called,  denote  the  efficient  act  of  God,  and  some 
of  them  his  mighty  power. 

(1.)  It  is  called  the  circumcision  of  the  heart ;  which 
implies  far  move  than  the  bare  suggestion  of  motives.  It 
imports  the  actual  excision  "  of  the  filth  of  the  flesh." 
"The  Lord  thy  God  will  circumcise  thy  heart  and  the 
heart  of  thy  seed,  to  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy 
heart  and  with  all  thy  soul."  "  In  whom  also  ye  are  cir- 
cumcised with  the  circumcision  made  without  hands,  in 
putting  off  the  body  of  the  sins  of  the  flesh  by  the  circum- 
cision of  Christ. "t 

(2.)  It  is  called  the  opening  of  the  eyes  of  the  blind 
and  the  unstopping  of  the  ears  of  the  deaf  "  The  Lord 
openeth  the  eyes  of  the  blind."  "  In  that  day  shall  the 
deaf  hear  the  words  of  the  book,  and  the  eyes  of  the  blind 
shall  see  out  of  obscurity  and  out  of  darkness."  "  The 
eyes  of  the  blind  shall  be  opened  and  the  ears  of  the  deaf 
shall  be  unstopped."     "  I  the  Lord  have  called  thee — to 

*  Ps.  110.  3.  Rom.  15.  IG— 19.  1  Cor.  2.  4,  5.  2  Cor.  4.  7. 
Gal.  2.  8.  Eph.  1.  18—20.  and  3.  7,  13,  IG.  17,  20.  Phil.  3.  10. 
Col.  1.  11— 13,29.     IThes.  1.5,  6 

t  Deut.  30.  6.      Col.  2.   11. 


140  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

open  the  blind  eyes. — And  I  will  bring  the  blind  by  a  way 
that  they  knew  not. — I  will  make  darkness  light  before 
them. — Hear  ye  deaf  and  look  ye  blind  that  ye  may  see." 
"  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is  upon  me,  because  he  hath 
anointed  me  to  preach — recovering  of  sight  to  the  blind."* 

To  show  that  he  had  come  to  execute  this  office,  our 
Saviour  opened  the  bodily  eyes  and  ears  :  and  to  make 
the  cases  more  parallel,  he  opened  them  by  a  word  :  and 
when  he  said  to  the  deaf  ear,  "  Ephphatha,  that  is,  Be 
opened,"  who  ever  dreamt  that  the  word  itself  produced 
the  effect,  or  had  any  more  potency  than  the  rod  of  Moses 
or  the  trumpets  of  Jericho  ? 

(3.)  It  is  called  a  new  birth.  If  then  the  first  birth  is 
altogether  an  effect  of  divine  power,  so  should  be  the 
second.  And  though  in  the  life  which  commences  at  the 
first  birth,  man  is  active,  yet  in  that  reception  of  life  he  is 
passive.  The  impartation  of  the  living  principle  is  wholly 
the  operation  of  God.  And  if  the  second  birth  is  limited 
to  the  causal  influence  of  God  in  producing  the  activity  of 
the  new  life,  man  is  passive  here  also.  If  the  name  is  e.\- 
tended  to  the  new  exercises,  (as  it  certainly  is  in  those 
two  instances  in  which  the  word  is  called  the  seed,t)  then 
man  is  both  passive  and  active  in  regeneration  ;  passive 
as  he  is  acted  upon,  and  active  as  he  puts  forth  the  new 
exercises  :  and  he  must  be  acknowledged  to  be  thus  far 
passive  by  all  Avho  hold  to  divine  efficiency..  "  Which 
were  born,  not  of  blood  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh  nor  of 
the  will  of  man,  but  of  God."     "  Verily,  verily  I  say  unto 

*  Ps.  146.  8.     IsaL.  29.  18.  and  35.  5.  and  42.  6, 7,  IG,  18.     Luke 
4.18.  t  James  1.18.     1  Pet.  1.  23, 


TO  DIVINE   EFFICIENCY.  141 

thee,  Except  a  man  be  born  again  he  cannot  see  the 
kingdom  of  God. — Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and 
of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God. 
That  which  is  born  of  flesh  is  flesh  ;  and  that  which  is 
born  of  the  Spirit  is  spirit.  Marvel  not  that  I  said  unto 
thee,  Ye  must  be  born  again.  The  wind  bloweth  where 
it  listeth,  and  thou  hearest  the  sound  thereof,  but  canst 
not  tell  whence  it  cometh  and  whither  it  goeth  :  so  is 
every  one  that  is  born  of  the  Spirit :"  a  marked  reproof 
of  ever)^  attempt  to  explain  the  mode  of  operation.  "  As 
then  he  that  was  born  after  the  flesh  persecuted  him  that 
was  born  after  the  Spirit,  even  so  it  is  now."  "  Whoso- 
ever is  born  of  God  overcometh  the  world."  "If  ye 
know  that  he  is  righteous,  ye  know  that  every  one  that 
doth  righteousness  is  born  of  him  ;"  alluding  to  the  son's 
inheriting  the  father's  nature.  But  if  he  who  is  called 
the  father  only  persuades,  as  well  might  you  expect  that 
every  hearer  would  partake  of  the  nature  of  the  preacher. 
"  Love  is  of  God,  and  every  one  that  loveth  is  born  of 
God."  The  same  allusion.  "  We  know  that  whosoever 
is  born  of  God  sinneth  not ;  but  he  that  is  begotten  of  God 
keepeth  himself,  and  that  wicked  one  toucheth  him  not." 
Still  the  same  allusion.  "  Whosoever  believeth  that  Jesus 
is  the  Christ  is  born  of  God  ;  and  every  one  that  loveth 
him  that  begat,  loveth  him  also  that  is  begotten  of  him." 
The  same  allusion  the  fourth  time.  Surely  there  must  be 
a  nearer  relation  between  God  and  believers  than  between 
a  teacher  and  his  pupil :  a  hlood  relation,  if  I  mav  so  say  ; 


142  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

a  relation  by  which  the  children  of  God  become  "  parta- 
kers of  the  divine  nature."* 

(4.)  It  is  called  a  resurrection.  And  if  the  dead  do 
not  rise  from  their-  graves  by  a  self-determining  power, 
at  the  voice  of  mere  persuasion,  neither  do  sinners  from 
spiritual  death.  The  dead  may  rise  at  a  summons,  as 
Lazarus  did,  and  as  the  dead  will  do  at  the  last  day  ;  but 
the  power  is  not  in  the  sound,  it  is  in  the  arm  of  God. 
And  in  a  moral  change  of  supreme  difficulty,  set  forth 
under  the  figure  of  a  resurrection  and  ascribed  to  the 
mighty  power  of  Ggd,  has. he  no  agency  but  that  of  mere 
persuasion  ?  Look  at  the  vision  of  Ezekiel.  "  The  hand 
of  the  Lord  was  upon  me  and  carried  me  out  in  the  Spirit 
— and  set  me  down  in  the  midst  of  the  valley  which  was 
full  of  bones  : — and  lo  they  w"ere  very  dry.  And  he  said 
unto  me,  Son  of  man,  can  these  bones  live  1  And  I  an- 
swered, O  Lord  God,  thou  knowest.  Again  he  said  unto 
me.  Prophesy  upon  these  bones  and  say  unto  them,  O  ye 
dry  bones,  hear  the  word  of  the  Lord.  Thus  saith  the 
Lord  God  unto  these  bones.  Behold  I  will  cause  breath  to 
enter  into  you  and  ye  shall  live. — So  I  prophesied  as  I 
was  commanded  :  and  as  I  prophesied,  behold  a  shaking, 
and  the  bones  came  together,  bone  to  his  bone. — Then 
said  he, — Prophesy  unto  the  wind  :  prophesy,  son  of  man, 
and  say  to  the  wind,  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God,  Come  from 
the  four  winds,  O  breath,  and  breathe  upon  these  slain 

*  John  1.  13.  and  3.  3—8.  Gal.  4.  29  2  Pet.  1.  4.  1  John  3. 
29.  and  4.  7.  and  5.  1,4,  18 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  143 

that  they  may  live.  So  I  prophesied  as  he  commanded 
me  ;  and  the  breath  came  into  them,  and  they  lived,  and 
stood  up  upon  their  feet  an  exceeding  great  army.  Then 
he  said  unto  me,  Son  of  man,  these  bones  are  the  whole 
house  of  Israel. — Therefore  prophesy  and  say  unto  them, 
Thus  saith  the  Lord  God, — Ye  shall  know  that  I  am  the 
Lord  when  I — shall  put  my  Spirit  in  you  and  ye  shall 
live."  Did  the  word  of  Ezekiel  in  this  case  at  all  limit  or 
conceal  the  power  of  God  ?  Turn  now  to  other  passages. 
"  As  the  Father  raiseth  up  the  dead  and  quickeneth  them, 
even  so  the  Son  quickeneth  whom  he  will. — The  hour  is 
coming  and  now  is,  when  the  dead  shall  hear  the  voice  of 
the  Son  of  God,  and  they  that  hear  shall  live."  "  Yield 
yourselves  unto  God  as  tliose  that  are  alive  from  the  dead." 
"  You  are  risen  with  him  through  the  faith  of  the  opera- 
tion of  God  who  hath  raised  him  from  the  dead.  And 
you,  being  dead  in  your  sins, — hath  he  quickened  together 
with  him."  "  I  saw  the  souls  of  them  that  were  beheaded 
for  the  witness  of  Jesus ; — and  they  lived  and  reigned 
with  Christ  a  thousand  years. — This  is  the  first  resurrec- 
tion. Blessed  and  holy  is  he  that  hath  part  in  the  first 
resurrection  :  on  such  the  second  death  hath  no  power." 
"  You  hath  he  quickened  who  were  dead  in  trespasses 
and  sins. — God  who  is  rich  in  mercy,  for  his  great  love 
\vherewith  he  loved  us  even  when  we  were  dead  in  sins, 
hath  quickened  us  together  with  Christ, — and  hath  raised 
us  up  together  and  made  us  sit  together  in  heavenly 
places  in  Christ  Jesus."* 

*  Ezek.  37.  1— 14.    John  5.  21,25.    Rom.  6.  13.    Eph.  2.  1— C 
Col.  2.  12,  13.     Rev.20.  4— 6. 


144  SCRIPTUUE  TESTIMONY 

(5.)  It  is  called  a  new  creation  :  and  it  would  seem  a 
most  extravagant  strain  of  a  figure  to  apply  such  a  name 
to  an  act  of  mere  persuasion.  Nothing  less  than  the  pro- 
rluction  of  a  new  life,  by  the  sajue  power  that  produced 
the    first,   would   seem  to  warrant   such  an   appellation. 

I  "  We  are  his  workmanship,  created  in  Christ  Jesus  unto 
good  works,  which  God  hath  before  ordained  that  we 
should  walk  in  them."  •'  When  he  seeth  his  children, 
the  work  of  my  hands,  in  the  midst  of  him,  they  shall 
sanctify  my  name."  "  That  they  may  see  and  know  and 
consider  and  understand  together  that  the  hand  of  the 
Lord  hath  done  this,  and  the  holy  Que  of  Israel  hath  cre- 
ated it."  "  Behold  I  create  new  heavens  and  a  new- 
earth,  and  the  former  shall  not  be  remembered  nor  come 
into  mind.  But  be  you  glad  and  rejoice  forever  in  that 
which  I  create  :  for  behold  I  create  Jerusalem  a  rejoicing 

I  and  her  people  a  joy."  "  Create  in  riie  a  clean  heart,  O 
God,  and  renew  a  right  spirit  within  me."  "  For  God 
I  who  commanded  the  light  to  shine  out  of  darkness,  hath 
shined  in  our  liearts,  to  give  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of 
tiie  glory  of  God  in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ."  "  If  any 
man  be  in  Christ  he  is  a  new  creature  :  old  things  are 
past  away,  behold  all  things  are  become  new.  And  all 
things  are  of  God,  who  hath  reconciled  us  to  himself  by 
Jesus  Christ."  "  In  Christ  Jesus  neither  circumcision 
availeth  any  thing  nor  uncircumcision,  but  a  new  crea- 
ture." "  Having  abolished  in  his  fiesh  the  enmity, — to 
make  in  himself  of  twain  one  new  man."  "  That  ye  put 
on  the  new  man,  which  after  God  is  created  in  righteous- 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  145 

ness  and  true  holiness."      "  And  he  that  sat  upon   the 
throne  said,  Behold  I  make  all  things  new."* 

X.  The  choice  of  the  elect  was  made,  not  in  view  of 
the  foreseen  operations  of  the  self-determining  power,  but 
by  the  sovereign  will  of  God  decreeing  to  make  them  holy  ; 
and  they  are  made  holy  in  consequence  of  that  decree. 
Not  as  foreseen  penitents,  but  as  sinners  to  be  renewed, 
they  were  given  to  Christ  in  the  eternal  covenant  of  re- 
demption, and  their  salvation  was  secured  to  him  as  his 
reward  :  and  in  consequence  of  that  conveyance  and 
promise  of  the  Father,  and  as  Christ's  reward,  they  are 
regenerated.  That  covenant  with  Christ  was,  through 
him  as  the  Head,  extended  to  the  Church  :  and  in  conse- 
quence of  those  stipulations  with  Christ  and  the  Church. 
— as  his  reward  and  in  virtue  of  his  intercession, — believ- 
ers are  kept  by  the  power  of  God  through  faith  unto  sal- 
vation. This  vital  connexion  of  election,  regeneration, 
and  perseverance,  with  each  other  and  with  Christ's  re- 
ward, and  with  the  covenants  of  redemption  and  grace, 
makes  them  very  difl'erent  things  from  what  they  are  in 
the  opposite  theory.  In  that  theory  election  is  only  a  de- 
cision to  bring  forward  means  to  which  it  is  foreseen  that 
the  self-determining  power  will  yield  and  will  continue  to 
yield.  That  incipient  and  continued  yielding  of  the  selt- 
determining  power,  under  motives  urged  by  the  Spirit,  is 
the  whole  of  regeneration  and  perseverance.  But  I  shall 
be  able  to  show  that  election,  regeneration,  and  perseve- 

^  Ps.  .51.  10.  Isai.  29.  23.  and  41.  20.  and  65.  17,  18.  2  Cor. 
4.  6.  and  5.  17,  18.  Gal.  6.  15.  Eph.  2.  10,  15.  and  4.  24.  Rev 
21.  5. 

13 


146  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

ranee  have,  on  the  contrary,  the  exact  forms  and  relations 
which  I  have  assigned  them. 

(I.)  The  choice  of  the  elect  was  made,  not  in  view  of 
the  foreseen  operations  of  the  self-determining  power,  but 
by  the  sovereign  will  of  God  decreeing  to  make  them 
holy ;  and  they  are  made  holy  in  consequence  of  that 
decree. 

[1.]  By  the  sovereign  will  of  God.  "  I  will  be  gra- 
cious to  whom  I  will  be  gracious,  and  will  show  mercy  on 
whom  I  will  show  mercy."  Dr  Fitch  calls  this  a  "simple 
will  and  wont  in  God  ;"  a  language  which  certainly  has 
sufficient  freedom  ;  though  I  suppose  he  means  to  exclude, 
what  we  equally  would  exclude,  a  will  founded  on  no  good 
reason.  But  this  wise  and  absolute  sovereignty,  whomso- 
ever it  may  offend,  gave  joy  to  the  heart  of  Christ.  "  In 
that  hour  Jesus  rejoiced  in  spirit  and  said,  I  thank  thee, 
O  Father,  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth,  that  thou  hast  hid 
these  things  from  the  wise  and  prudent  and  hast  revealed 
them  unto  babes.  Even  so,  Father,  for  so  it  seemed  good 
in  thy  sight.  All  things  are  delivered  to  me  of  my  Father  : 
and  no  man  knoweth  who  the  Son  is  but  the  Father,  and 
who  the  Father  is  but  the  Son,  and  he  to  whom  the  Son 
will  reveal  him."  "The  children  being  not  yet  born, 
neither  having  done  any  good  or  evil,  that  the  purpose  of 
God  according  to  election  might  stand,  not  of  works  but  of 
him  that  calleth,  it  was  said  unto  her.  The  elder  shall 
serve  the  younger :  as  it  is  \vritten,  Jacob  have  I  loved  but 
Esau  have  I  hated.  What  shall  we  say  then  ?  Is  there 
unrighteousness  with  God  ?  God  forbid.  For  he  saith 
to  Moses,  I  will  have  mercy  on  whom  I  will  have  mercy, 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  147 

and  I  will  have  compassion  on  whom  I  will  have  com- 
passion. So  then  it  is  not  of  him  that  willeth  nor  of  him 
that  runneth,  but  of  God  that  showeth  mercy.  For  the 
Scripture  saith  unto  Pharaoh,  Even  for  this  same  purpose 
have  I  raised  thee  up,  that  I  might  show  my  power  in  thee, 
and  that  my  name  might  be  declared  throughout  all  the 
earth.  Therefore  hath  he  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have 
mercy,  and  whom  he  will  he  hardeneth.  Thou  wilt  say 
then  unto  me,  Why  doth  he  yet  find  fault  ?  for  who  hath 
resisted  his  will  ?  [His  decretive  will  in  distinction  from 
his  preceptive :  a  distinction  which  the  apostle  here  brings 
into  view  and  does  not  deny,  but  in  the  context  clearly 
affirms.]  Nay  but  O  man,  who  art  thou  that  repliest 
against  God  ?  Shall  the  thing  formed  say  to  him  that 
formed  it,  Why  hast  thou  made  me  thus  ?  Hath  not 
the  potter  power  over  the  clay,  of  the  same  lump  to  make 
one  vessel  unto  honour  and  another  unto  dishonour  ?" 
"  What  saith  the  answer  of  God  unto  him?  I  have  re- 
served to  myself  seven  thousand  men  who  have  not  bowed 
the  knee  to  Baal.  Even  so  then  at  this  present  time  also, 
there  is  a  remnant  according  to  the  election  of  grace. — 
What  then  %  Israel  hath  not  obtained  that  which  he  seek- 
eth  for,  but  the  election  hath  obtained  it  and  the  rest  were 
blinded."  "  Ye  see  your  calling,  brethren,  how  that  not 
many  wise  men  after  the  flesh,  not  many  mighty,  not 
many  noble  are  called  :  but  God  hath  chosen  the  foolish 
things  of  the  world  to  confound  the  wise  ;  and  God  hath 
chosen  the  weak  things  of  the  world  to  confound  the 
things  which  are  mighty;  and  base  things  of  the  world 
and  things  which  are  despised  hath  God  chosen,  yea  and 


148  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

things  which  are  not,  to  bring  to  naught  things  tliat  are, 
that  no  flesh  should  glory  in  his  presence ; — that,  accord- 
ing as  it  is  written,  He  that  glorieth  let  him  glory  in  the 
Lord."* 

But  if  God  only  foresaw  who  would  repent  if  placed  in 
such  circumstances,  and  who  would  not,  his  mere  decision 
to  place  them  in  such  circumstances  could  not  be  that 
.sovereign  election  which  is  expressed  in  these  passages. 

Other  texts  support  election  without  so  distinctly 
marking  its  sovereignty.  "  God  hath  not  appointed  us  to 
wrath,  but  to  obtain  salvation  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  ' 
''Many  are  called  but  few  are  chosen."  "Ye  are  a  cho- 
sen generation, — that  ye  should  show  forth  the  praises  of 
him  who  hath  called  you  out  of  darkness  into  his  marvel- 
lous light,  "t 

[2.]  Decreeing  to  make  them  holy.  "  We  are  bound 
to  give  thanks  alway  to  God  for  you,  brethren,  beloved  of 
the  Lord,  because  God  hath  from  the  beginning  chosen 
you  to  salvation  through  sanctification  of  the  Spirit  and 
belief  of  the  truth."  "  Ye  have  not  chosen  me  but  I  have 
chosen  you,  and  ordained  you  that  you  should  go  and 
bring  forth  fruit  and  that  your  fruit  should  remain." 
''That  he  might  make  known  the  riches  of  his  glory  on 
the  vessels  of  mercy  which  he  had  afore  prepared  unto 
glory  ;  even  us  whom  he  hath  called,  not  of  the  Jews  only 
but  also  of  the  Gentiles.  As  he  saith  also  in  Osee,  I  will 
call  them  my  people  which  were  not  my  people. — And — 

"  Exod.  33.  19.     Luke  10.  2J ,  22.     Rom.  9.  11—21.  and  11.4. 
5,7.     1  Cor.  1.2G— 29,31. 

*  Mat.  20.  16.  and  22.  14      1  Thes.  5.  9.     1  Pet  2.  9. 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  149 

in  the  place  where  it  was  said, — Ye  are  not  my  people, 
there  shall  they  be  called  the  children  of  the  living  God. 
Esaias  also  crieth  concerning  Israel, — A  remnant  shall  be 
saved. — Except  the  Lord  of  sabaoth  had  left  us  a  seed, 
we  had  been  as  Sodoma  and  had  been  made  like  unto 
Gomorrha."  "According  as  he  hath  chosen  us  in  him 
before  the  foundation  of  the  world,  that  we  should  be  holy 
and  without  blame  before  him  in  love  ;  having  predesti- 
nated us  unto  the  adoption  of  children  by  Jesus  Christ  to 
himself  according  to  the  good  pleasure  of  his  will,  to  the 
praise  of  the  glory  of  his  grace. — In  whom  also  we  have 
obtained  an  inheritance,  being  predestinated  according  to 
the  purpose  of  him  who  worketh  all  things  after  the  coun- 
sel .  of  his  own  will."  "  We  know  that  all  things  work 
together  for  good  to  them  that  love  God,  to  them  which 
are  the  called  according  to  his  purpose.  For  whom  he 
did  foreknow  he  also  did  predestinate  to  be  conformed  to 
the  image  of  his  Son,  that  he  might  be  the  first  born 
among  many  brethren.  Moreover  whom  he  predestinated 
them  he  also  called,  and  whom  he  called  them  he  also 
justified,  and  whom  he  justified  them  he  also  glorified." 
"Elect  according  to  the  foreknowledge  of  God  the  Father, 
through  sanctification  of  the  Spirit  unto  obedience."* 

The  last  two  passages  speak  of  foreknowledge  :  but  as 
the  elect  were  predestined  "to  be  conformed  to  the 
image  "  of  Christ,  and  as  that  purpose  is  unfailingly  fol- 
lowed by  effectual  calling  and  "  sanctification  of  the 
Spirit,"  it  is  impossible  it  should  be  a  mere  foreknowledge 

»  John  15.  16,     Rom.  8.  23—30.  and  9.  23—99      Epli.  1.  A— 11. 
2Thes.  2.  13.    1  Pet.  1.2. 

13* 


150  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

of  what  the  self-determining  power  would  do.  Knowledge^ 
whether  past  or  present,  is  frequently  in  Scripture  put  for 
that  favourable  regard  which  exists  among  acquaintance. 
"  Thou  hast  said,  I  know  thee  by  name  and  thou  hast  also 
found  grace  in  my  sight. — And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses, 
I  will  do  this  thing  also  ; — for  thou  hast  found  grace  in  my 
sight  and  I  know  thee  by  name."  "  Then  will  I  profess 
unto  them,  I  never  knew  you."  "  I  am  the  good  Shep- 
herd, and  know  my  sheep  and  am  known  of  mine."  "  God 
hath  not  cast  away  his  people  which  he  foreknew." 
"  The  foundation  of  God  standeth  sure,  having  this  seal. 
The  Lord  knoweth  them  that  are  his."*  According  to 
this  meaning  of  knowledge,  the  foreknowledge  in  question 
was  nothing  but  a  special  love  exercised  from  eternity. 

[3.]  And  they  are  made  holy  in  consequence  of  that 
decree.  "As  many  as  were  ordained  to  eternal  life  be- 
lieved "  "  The  hidden  wisdom,  [the  way  of  salvation, t] 
which  God  ordained  before  the  world  unto  our  glory  ;" 
but  is  since  revealed,  "  to  the  intent  that  now  unto  the 
principalities  and  powers  in  heavenly  places  might  be 
known  by  the  Church,  [the  body  of  sanctified  individuals,] 
the  manifold  wisdom  of  God,  according  to  the  eternal  pur- 
pose which  he  purposed  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord."| 

(2.)  Not  as  foreseen  penitents,  but  as  sinners  to  be 
renewed,  the  elect  were  given  to  Christ  in  the  eternal 
covenant  of  redemption,  and  their  salvation  was  secured 
to  him  as  his  reward. 

**  Exod.  33.12,17.  Mat.  7.  23.  John  10.  14.  Rom.  11.  2. 
2  Tim.  2.  19. 

t  Col.  1.  27.        I  Acts  13.  48.     1  Cor.  2.  7.     Eph.  3.  10,  11. 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  151 

The  tenour  of  tliis  covenant  can  be  gathered  only  from 
the  references  made  to  it  in  the  revelation  to  men,  and 
particularly    from   the   prophetic   and   historic   notices  of 
Christ's  reward.     "  When  thou   shalt  make  his  soul  an 
offering  for  sin,  he  shall  see  his  seed,  he  shall  prolong  his 
days,  and  the   pleasure  of  the  Lord   shall   prosper  in  his 
hand.     He  shall  see  of  the  travail  of  his  soul  and  shall  be 
satisfied. — I  will  divide  him  a  portion  with  the  great,  and 
he  shall  divide  the  spoil  with  the  strong,  because  he  hath 
poured  out  his  soul  unto  death."     "  Why  do  the  heathen 
rage  and  the  people  imagine  a  vain  thing  ?     The  kings 
of  the  earth  set  themselves,  and  the  rulers  take  counsel 
together    against    the   Lord   and     against   his    anointed. 
[Applied  to  Herod  and  Pilate  and  the  Roman  soldiers  and 
the  Jews.*] — Yet  have  I  set  my  king  upon  my  holy  hill  of 
Zion.     I  will   declare  the   decree.     The  Lord  hath   said 
unto  me,  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee. 
Ask  of  me   and   I  shall  give  thee  the  heathen  for  thine 
inheritance  and  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for   thy 
possession."     "  They  shall  fear  thee  as  long  as  the  sun 
and  moon  endure. — He  shall  come  down  like  rain  upon 
the  mown  grass,  as  showers  that  water  the  earth.      In  his 
days  shall  the  righteous  flourish,  and  abundance  of  peace 
so  long  as  the  moon  endureth.      He  shall  have  dominion 
also  from  sea  to  sea  and  from  the  river  to  the  ends  of  the 
earth. — All  nations  shall  serve  him. — His  name  shall  en- 
dure forever, — and  men  shall  be  blessed  in  him  :    all  na- 
tions shall  call  him  blessed."     "  I  have  made  a  covenant 
with  my  Chosen. — My  faithfulness  and  my  mercy  shall  be 
with  him. — He  shall  cry  unto  me.  Thou  art  my  Father.-— 

*  Acts  4.  25—27. 


15*2  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

I  will  make  him  my  First  born. — His  seed  also  will  I 
make  to  endure  forever,  and  his  throne  as  the  days  of 
heaven."  "  I  the  Lord — will — give  thee  for  a  covenant 
of  the  people,  for  a  light  of  the  Gentiles,  to  open  the  blind 
eyes,  to  bring  out  the  prisoners  from  the  prison,  and  them 
that  sit  in  darkness  out  of  the  prison-house."  "  I  will 
also  give  thee  for  a  light  to  the  Gentiles,  that  thou  mayst 
be  my  salvation  unto  the  end  of  the  earth. — I  will — give 
thee  for  a  covenant  of  the  people,  to  establish  the  earth, 
to  cause  to  inherit  the  desolate  heritages  ;  that  thou  mayst 
say  to  the  prisoners.  Go  forth."  "  Therefore  doth  my 
Father  love  me,  because  I  lay  down  my  life. — This  com- 
mandment have  I  received  of  my  Father."  "  Who  for 
the  joy  that'was  set  before  him  endured  the  cross,  despi- 
sing the  shame,  and  is  set  down  at"  the  right  hand  of  the 
throne  of  God."  "  Being  found  in  fashion  as  a  man,  he 
humbled  himself  and  became  obedient  unto  death,  even 
the  death  of  the  cross :  wherefore  God  also  hath  highly 
exalted  him  and  given  him  a  name  which  is  above  every 
name."  "  Whom  he  hath  appointed  heir  of  all  things : 
who, — when  he  had  by  himself  purged  our  sins,  sat  down 
on  the  right  hand  of  the  Majesty  on  high,  being  made  so 
much  better  than  the  angels  as  he  hath  by  inheritance 
obtained  a  more  excellent  name  than  they. — Thou  hast 
loved  righteousness  and  hated  iniquity :  therefore  God, 
even  thy  God,  hath  anointed  thee  with  the  oil  of  gladness 
above  thy  fellows."* 

From  these  quotations  it  is  evident  that  Christ  by  cove- 

*  Ps.  2.  1—8.  and  72.  5—8,  11,  17.  and  89.  3,  24—29.  Isai.  42. 
6,  7.  and  49.  G— 9.  and  53.  10— 12.  John  10.  17,  18.  Phil.  2.  8,9. 
Heb.  1.2— 4,  9.  and  12.  2. 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  153 

nam  was  entitled  to  the  reward  of  a  glorious  kingdom  of 
holy  and  happy  subjects,  and  to  "  see  of  the  travail  of  his 
soul"  until  he  should  be  "  satisfied."  But  light  still  more 
decisive  beams  upon  us.  The  salvation  of  the  elect  was 
expressly  promised  to  Christ  in  the  eternal  covenant. 
"  Paul, — an  apostle  of  Jesus  Christ,  according  to  the  faith 
of  God's  elect; — in  hope  of  eternal  life  which  God,  that 
cannot  lie,  promised  before  the  world  began."  Promised 
to  whom  1  No  man  was  there  to  receive  the  promise  : 
none  was  there  but  the  Mediator.  And  so  distinct  and 
specific  was  the  assignment,  that  all  their  names  were 
written  in  his  book  of  life.  "  And  they  that  dwell  on  the 
earth  shall  wonder,  (whose  names  were  not  written  in  the 
book  of  life  fro7u  the  foundation  of  the  icorld,)  when  they 
behold  the  beast."  "  And  all  that  dwell  upon  the  earth 
shall  worship  him,  whose  names  are  not  written  in  the 
book  of  life  of  the  Lamb  slain  from  the  foundation  of  the 
world."'  "  And  there  shall  in  no  wise  enter  into  it  any 
thing  that  defileth, — but  they  which  are  written  in  the 
Lamb's  book  of  life."  "  And  I  saw  the  dead,  small  and 
great,  stand  before  God,  and  the  books  were  opened,  and 
another  book  was  opened  which  is  the  book  of  life." 
"Clement  also,  and — other  my  fellow  labourers,  whose 
names  are  in  the  book  of  life."  "  At  that  time  thy  people 
shall  be  delivered,  every  one  that  shall  be  found  written  in 
the  book."* 

(3.)    In  consequence  of  that  conveyance  and  promise 

^  Dan.  12.  1.     Phil.  4.  3.    Tit.  1.  1,  2.      Rev.  13.  S.  and  17.  8 
and20.  12,  and21.27 


154  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

of  the  Father,  and  as  Christ's  reward,  the  elect  are  regene- 
rated. 

In  receiving  the  promises  for  his  posterity,  Abraham 
was  a  type  of  Christ.  The  influence  upon  his  posterity 
therefore  of  the  covenant  made  with  him,  set  forth  the  in- 
fluence upon  the  elect  of  the  covenant  made  with  Christ. 
And  what  was  the  influence  of  the  covenant  made  with 
Abraham  ?  "  The  Lord  thy  God  hath  chosen  thee  to  be 
a  special  people  unto  himself  above  all  the  people  that 
are  upon  the  face  of  the  earth.  The  Lord  did  not  set  his 
love  upon  you  nor  choose  you  because  ye  were  more  in 
number  than  any  people,  (for  ye  were  the  fewest  of  all 
people  ;)  but  because  the  Lord  loved  you,  and  because  he 
would  keep  the  oath  which  he  had  sworn  unto  your  fa- 
thers." So  it  is  with  those  who  were  given  to  Christ  for  a 
seed.  They  are  regenerated,  not  for  any  thing  in  them, 
but  on  account  of  the  eternal  covenant  with  him.  "  Who 
hath  saved  us  and  called  us  with  a  holy  calling,  not  accord- 
ing to  our  works,  but  according  to  his  own  purpose  and 
grace  which  was  given  us  in  Christ  Jesus  before  the  world 
began."  And  nothing  can  defeat  that  purpose.  They  may 
be  hid  in  the  depths  of  heathenism ;  fenced  round  by  the 
throne  and  the  altar  and  the  school  of  philosophy ;  but  no- 
thing can  obstruct  the  way  of  Christ  when  he  comes  to  reco- 
ver his  own.  When  Paul  had  entered  the  proud  and  for- 
bidding Corinth,  the  Lord  Jesus  said  to  him  in  a  vision, 
"  Be  not  afraid,  but  speak  and  hold  not  thy  peace  ;  for  I 
am  with  thee,  and  no  man  shall  set  on  thee  to  hurt 
thee :     for   T    have   much   people    in   this   city."       But 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  155 

Christ's  own  testimony  is  the  most  decisive.  "  All  that 
the  Father  giveth  me  shall  come  to  me,  and  him  that 
Cometh  to  me  I  will  in  no  wise  cast  out."  "  Other  sheep 
I  have  which  are  not  of  this  fold  :  them  also  I  must  bring, 
and  they  shall  hear  my  voice. — But  ye  believe  not  because 
ye  are  not  of  my  sheep. — My  sheep  hear  my  voice,  and 
I  know  them,  and  they  follow  me. — My  Father  which 
gave  them  me  is  greater  than  all."  "  I  have  manifested 
thy  name  unto  the  men  which  thou  gavest  me  out  of  the 
world  :  thine  they  were,  and  thou  gavest  them  me,  and 
they  have  kept  thy  word."* 

(4.)  That  covenant  with  Christ  was,  through  him  as 
the  Head,  extended  to  the  Church :  and  in  consequence 
of  those  stipulations  with  Christ  and  the  Church, — as  his 
reward  and  in  virtue  of  his  intercession, — believers  are 
kept  by  the  power  of  God  through  faith  unto  salvation. 

There  was  a  promise  to  Christ  respecting  the  elect : 
but  as  moral  agents  they  were  to  be  treated  with  directly. 
And  when  God  came  to  address  himself  to  them,  he  gave 
them  while  impenitent,  as  he  did  the  rest  of  the  world, 
his  invitations  and  conditional  promises.  But  when,  in 
consequence  of  the  covenant  with  Christ,  they  are  made 
believers  and  sons  of  God,  he  extends  to  them,  now  com- 
posing the  Church,  absolute  promises  of  preserving  grace 
and  eternal  salvation.  I  will  first  show  you  that  God 
gives  these  absolute  promises  to  the  Church  or  body  of 
believers ;   and  secondly,  that  he  ensures  their  perseve- 

'  Deut.  7.  6—8.  John  6.  37.  and  10.  10,  20—29.  and  17.  0,  Acts 
18.9,10.    2Tiin.  1.  9. 


156  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

ranee  as  the  reward  of  Christ  and  in  virtue  of  his  interces- 
sion. 

[I.]  God  has  given  to  the  Church  or  body  of  believers 
absolute  promises  of  preserving  grace  and  eternal  salva- 
tion. "  The  steps  of  a  good  man  are  ordered  by  the 
Lord,  and  he  delighteth  in  his  way.  Though  he  fall  he 
shall  not  be  utterly  cast  down,  for  the  Lord  upholdeth  him 
.with  his  hand. — The  Lord — forsaketh  not  his  saints  ; 
they  are  preserved  forever."  "  They  shall  be  my  people 
and  I  will  be  their  God.  And  I  will  give  them  one  heart 
and  one  way,  that  they  may  fear  me  forever.— And  I  will 
make  an  everlasting  covenant  with  them  that  I  will  not 
turn  away  from  them  to  do  them  good,  but  I  will  put  my 
fear  in  their  hearts  that  they  shall  not  depart  from  me.'' 
"  When  God  made  promise  to  Abraham,  because  he 
could  swear  by  no  greater  he  swore  by  himself;  saying, 
surely,  blessing,  I  will  bless  thee,  and  multiplying,  I  will 
multiply  thee.  And  so  after  he  had  patiently  endured  he 
obtained  the  promise.  For  men  verily  swear  by  the  great- 
er, and  an  oath  for  confirmation  is  to  them  an  end  of  all 
strife.  Wherein  God,  willing  more  abundantly  to  shoic 
7into  the  heirs  of  promise  the  immutability  of  his  coufjsel. 
confirmed  it  by  an  oath ;  that  by  two  immutable  things  in 
which  it  was  impossible  for  God  to  lie,  we  might  have  a 
strong  consolation  who  have  fled  for  refuge  to  lay  hold 
upon  the  hope  set  before  us  ;  which  hope  we  have  as  an 
anchor  of  the  soul  both  sure  and  steadfast."  "Now  to 
him  that  is  of  power  to  stablish  you  according  to  my  Go.«- 
pel, — be  glory  through  Jesus  Christ  forever."'     "  To  hif 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  157 

own  Master  he  standeth  or  falleth.  Yea  he  shall  be  hold- 
en  up;  for  God  is  able  to  make  him  stand."  "  I  know 
whom  I  have  believed  ;  and  I  am  persuaded  that  he  is 
able  to  keep  that  which  I  have  committed  unto  him 
against  that  day."  "  Who  are  kept  by  the  power  of  God 
through  faith  unto  salvation."  "  Now  unto  him  that  is 
able  to  keep  you  from  falling,  and  to  present  you  faultless 
before  the  presence  of  his  glory  with  exceeding  joy, — be — 
dominion  and  power."  "  The  anointing  which  ye  have 
received  of  him  abideth  in  you,  and — ye  shall  abide  in 
him."  "They  went  out  from  us,  but  they  were  not  of 
us;  for  if  they  had  been  of  us,  they  would  no  doubt  have 
continued  with  us ;  but  they  went  out  that  they  might  be 
made  manifest  that  they  were  not  all  of  us."  "  Hence- 
forth there  is  laid  up  for  me  a  crown  of  righteousness 
which  the  Lord  the  righteous  Judge  shall  give  me  at  that 
day. — The  Lord  shall  deliver  me  from  every  evil  work, 
and  will  preserve  me  unto  his  heavenly  kingdom."  "  Be- 
ing confident  of  this  very  thing,  that  he  which  hath  begun 
a  good  work  in  you  will  perform  it  until  the  day  of  Je- 
sus Christ."  "  I  am  the  Lord,  I  change  not,  therefore  ye 
sons  of  Jacob  are  not  consumed."  "  There  hath  no  tempta- 
tion taken  you  but  such  as  is  common  to  man  :  but  God  is 
faithful  who  will  not  suffer  you  to  be  tempted  above  that 
ye  are  able,  but  will  with  the  temptation  also  make  a  way 
to  escape,  that  ye  may  be  able  to  bear  it."  "  The  very 
God  of  peace  sanctify  you  wholly :  and  I  pray  God  your 
whole  spirit  and  soul  and  body  be  preserved  blameless 
unto  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Faithful  is  he 
that  calleth  you,  who  also  will  do  it."    "  The  Lord  is  faith- 

14 


158  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

ful  who  shall  stablish  you  and  keep  you  from  evil.  And 
we  have  confidence  in  the  Lord  touching  you,  that  ye  both 
do  and  will  do  the  things  which  we  command  you.  And 
the  Lord  direct  your  hearts  into  the  love  of  God  and  into 
the  patient  waiting  for  Christ."* 

[2.]  It  is  as  the  reward  of  Christ  and  in  virtue  of  his 
intercession  that  God  ensures  the  perseverance  of  believers. 

First,  they  are  kept  in  consequence  of  their  election : 
and  as  they  were  elected  in  Christ,  in  other  words,  were  giv- 
en to  him  as  a  reward  in  the  eternal  covenant,  they  are  kept 
in  consequence  of  being  thus  given  to  him.  "  As  many  as 
were  ordained  to  eternal  life  believed."  Then  none  be- 
lieve but  those  who  are  elected  to  eternal  life  :  of  course 
no  believer  can  fall  away :  and  this  security  arises  from 
their  election  in  Christ.  "  Ye  have  not  chosen  me,  but  I 
have  chosen  you,  and  ordained  you, that  you  should  go  and 
bring  forth  fruit,  and  that  your  fruit  should  remain." 
"  Come,  ye  blessed  of  my  Father,  inherit  the  kingdom  pre- 
pared for  you  from  the  foundation  of  the  world."  That 
antecedent  purpose  and  preparation  stood  inseparably  con- 
nected with  their  perseverance  to  eternal  life.  "  To  sit  on 
my  right  hand  and  on  my  left  is  not  mine  to  give,  but  it  shall 
be  given  to  them  for  whom  it  is  prepared  of  my  Father."! 

Secondly,  Christ  is  the  Mediator  of  that  better  cove- 
nant which,   in  distinction  from  the  covenant  of  Sinai, 

*  Ps.  37.  23,  24,  28.  Jer.  32.  38—40.  Mai.  3.  6.  Rom.  14.  4.  and 
16.  25,  27.  1  Cor.  10.  13.  Phil.  1.6.  1  Thes.  5.  23,  24.  2  Thes.  3. 
3—5.  2  Tim.  1.  12.  and  4.  8,  18.  Heb.  6.  13—19.  1  Pet.  1.5.  Jude 
24,  25.  1  John  2.  19,  27. 

t  Mat.  20.  23.  and  25.  34.  John  15.  16.  Acts  13.  48. 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  159 

secures  the  persevering  holiness  of  believers.  "  But  now 
hath  he  obtained  a  more  excellent  ministry,  by  how  much 
also  he  is  the  Mediator  of  a  better  covenant  which  was 
established  upon  better  promises. — For  finding  fault  with 
them  he  saith,  Behold  the  days  come,  saith  the  Lord, 
when  I  will  make  a  new  covenant  with  the  house  of  Is- 
rael and  with  the  house  of  Judah ;  not  according  to  the 
covenant  that  I  made  with  their  fathers  in  the  day  when  I 
took  them  by  the  hand  to  lead  them  out  of  the  land  of 
Egypt ;  because  they  continued  not  in  my  covenant,  and 
I  regarded  them  not,  saith  the  Lord.  For  this  is  the  cove- 
nant that  I  will  make  with  the  house  of  Israel  after  those 
days,  saith  the  Lord  :  I  will  put  my  laws  into  their  mind 
and  write  them  in  their  hearts ;  and  I  loill  be  to  them  a 
God,  and  they  shall  be  to  me  a  people."* 

Thirdly,  Christ,  having  died  to  redeem  his  people  from 
all  iniquity,  did,  by  one  offering,  secure  their  salvation  ; 
and  God,  after  calling  them  to  the  fellowship  of  his  Son, 
is  bound,  in  faithfulness  to  him,  to  keep  them  to  his  ever- 
lasting kingdom.  "  For  by  one  offering  he  hath  perfected 
forever  them  that  are  sanctified  :  whereof  the  Holy  Ghost 
also  is  a  witness  to  us.  For  after  that  he  had  said  before, 
This  is  the  covenant  that  I  will  make  with  them  after 
those  days,  saith  the  Lord  :  I  will  put  my  laws  into  their 
hearts  and  in  their  minds  will  I  write  them,  and  their  sins 
and  iniquities  will  I  remember  no  more  :  now  where  re- 
mission of  these  is,  there  is  no  more  offering  for  sin." 
"  Who  gave  himself  for  us,  that  he  might  redeem  us  from 
all  iniquity  and  purify  unto  himself  a  peculiar  people  zeal- 

*  Heb.  8.  6—10. 


160  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

ous  of  good  works."  "  Who  shall  also  confirm  you  unto 
the  end,  that  ye  may  be  blameless  in  the  day  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ.  God  is  faithful  by  whom  ye  were  called 
unto  the  fellowship  of  his  Son."* 

Hence  the  whole  work  is  every  where  said  to  be  done 
through  Christ  or  in  Christ,  and  believers  are  said  to 
have  been  raised  icith  Christ.  "  God, — when  we  were 
dead  in  sins,  hath  quickened  us  together  with  Christ, 
— and  hath  raised  us  up  together  and  made  us  sit  toge- 
ther in  heavenly  places  in  Christ  Jesus ;  that  in  the  ages 
to  come  he  might  show  the  exceeding  riches  of  his  grace 
in  his  kindness  towards  us  through  Christ  Jesus. — For  we 
are  his  workmanship,  created  in  Christ  Jesus  unto  good 
works."  t 

Fourthly,  hence  the  promise  of  preserving  grace  is 
made  to  believers  as  the  seed  of  Christ,  or  rather  is  made 
to  Christ  for  them.  "  I  have  made  a  covenant  with  my 
Chosen. — His  seed — will  I  make  to  endure  forever. — If 
his  children  forsake  my  law  and  walk  not  in  my  judg- 
ments,— then  will  I  visit  their  transgression  with  the  rod 
and  their  iniquity  with  stripes  ;  nevertheless  my  loving 
kindness  will  I  not  utterly  take  from  him  nor  suffer  my 
faithfulness  to  fail.  My  covenant  will  I  not  break  nor 
alter  the  thing  that  is  gone  out  of  my  lips. — His  seed  shall 
endure  forever."| 

Fifthly,  Christ  himself  testifies  that  the  perseverance 
of  the  saints  is  owing  to  their  having  been  given  to  him. 
"  This  is  the  Father's  will  which  hath  sent  me,  that  of  all 

'  1  Cor.  1.  3,  0.  Tit.  2.  14.   Heb.  10.  14—18.     f  Eph.  2.  4—10 
t  Ps.  89.  3.  4.  29—36 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY.  161 

which  he  hath  given  mc  I  should  lose  nothing,  but  should 
raise  it  up  again  at  the  last  day.  And  this  is  the  will  of 
him  that  sent  me,  that  every  one  which  seeth  the  Son  and 
believeth  on  him,  may  have  everlasting  life,  and  I  will 
raise  him  up  at  the  last  day."  "  Ye  believe  not  because 
ye  are  not  of  my  sheep. — My  sheep  hear  my  voice,  and  I 
know  them,  and  they  follow  me  :  and  I  give  unto  them 
eternal  life,  and  they  shall  never  perish,  neither  shall  any 
pluck  them  out  of  my  hand.  My  Father  which  gave  them 
me  is  greater  than  all,  and  none  is  able  to  pluck  them  out 
of  my  Father's  hand."  "  Thou  hast  given  him  power 
over  all  flesh,  that  he  should  give  eternal  life  to  as  many 
as  thou  hast  given  him."  "  That  the  saying  might  be 
fulfilled  which  he  spoke,  Of  them  which  thou  gavest  me 
have  I  lost  none."* 

Sixthly,  Christians  are  kept  and  saved  in  consequence 
of  Christ's  intercession.  A  specimen  of  that  intercession 
may  be  seen  in  that  wonderful  prayer  which  he  offered 
just  before  he  entered  Gethsemane.  "  I  pray  for  them  : 
I  pray  not  for  the  world,  but  for  them  which  thou  hast 
given  me. — Holy  Father,  keep  through  thine  own  name 
those  whom  thou  hast  given  me,  that  they  may  be  one  as 
we  are.  While  I  was  with  them  in  the  world  I  kept  them 
in  thy  name.  Those  that  thou  gavest  me  I  have  kept,  and 
none  of  them  is  lost  but  the  son  of  perdition. — I  pray  not 
that  thou  shouldst  take  them  out  of  the  world,  but  that 
thou  shouldst  keep  them  from  the  evil. — Sanctify  them 
through  thy  truth. — For  their  sakes  I  sanctify  myself,  that 
they  also  might  be  sanctified  through  the  truth.     Neither 

*  John  6.  39,  40.  and  10.  26—29.  and  17.  2.  and  18.  9. 
14* 


162  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY 

pray  I  for  these  alone,  but  for  them  also  which  shall  be- 
lieve on  me  through  their  word  :  tliat  they  all  may  be  one; 
as  thou,  Father,  art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee,  that  they  also 
may  be  one  in  us. — And  the  glory  which  thou  gavest  me 
I  have  given  them,  that  they  may  be  one  even  as  we  are 
one  :  I  in  them  and  thou  in  me,  that  they  may  be  made 
perfect  in  one,  and  that  the  world  may  know  that  thou — 
hast  loved  them  as  thou  hast  loved  me.  Father,  I  will 
that  they  also  whom  thou  hast  given  me  be  with  me  where 
I  am,  that  they  may  behold  my  glory  which  thou  hast 
given  me. — I  have  declared  unto  them  thy  name,  and  will 
declare  it,  that  the  love  wherewith  thou  hast  loved  me  may 
be  in  them  and  I  in  them."* 

Here  then  we  see  the  elect  given  to  Christ  by  solemn 
covenant,  as  the  reward  of  his  stipulated  obedience  in  the 
work  of  redemption,  with  an  absolute  engagement  that 
they  should  be  regenerated,  kept,  and  saved.  In  fulfil- 
ment of  that  covenant  we  see  them  actually  regenerated 
and  perseveringly  sanctified  by  the  power  of  God,  express- 
ly as  the  reward  of  Christ  and  in  virtue  of  his  interces- 
sion. Thus  their  incipient  and  continued  sanctification 
is  wrought  by  the  power  of  God,  in  fulfilment  of  a  solemn 
covenant  with  his  Son,  and  in  payment  of  a  debt  due  to 
him.  Surely  that  sanctification  must  be  secured  either  by 
efficiency  or  the  absolute  control  of  motives.  It  cannot 
be  left  to  the  casual  operation  of  the  self-determining  pow- 
er, under  excitements  which  many  resist.  And  yet  the 
opposite  theory  represents  God  as  merely  foreseeing  that 
the  self-determining  power  would  begin  and  finish  the 

*  John  17.  9—26. 


TO  DIVINE  EFFICIENCY,  163 

work  if  he  brought  forward  such  means :  and  his  only  de- 
cision respecting  the  whole  concern  was,  to  bring  forward 
the  means.  He  has  nothing  to  do  with  decreeing  or  pro- 
ducing or  even  occasioning  these  effects,  only  as  he  pre- 
sents the  means  with  a  foreknowledge  of  the  issue.  After 
the  means  are  applied  to  both  classes  alike,  they  them- 
selves produce  the  only  difference  which  exists  between 
them.  And  now,  when  the  Bible  is  filled  with  such  re- 
presentations as  have  been  produced,  does  it  all  end  in 
this,  that  the  Father's  decree  and  covenant  with  his  Son 
were  only  to  send  to  both  classes  alike  the  means  of  grace 
and  the  illuminating  Spirit  ?  Then  they  were  not  two 
classes  except  in  the  mere  foreknowledge  of  God. 

I  have  now  finished  the  Scripture  testimony  to  divine 
efficiency.  I  by  no  means  suppose  that  I  have  found  all 
the  texts.  Many  which  I  have  found  have  been  cast,  or 
will  be  cast,  into  other  chapters  to  support  related  branch- 
es of  the  subject.  But  in  this  single  chapter  near  three 
hundred  texts  are  arrayed  in  direct  support  of  the  main 
point.  Such  a  current  of  proof  runs  not  through  the  Bi- 
ble in  support  of  any  other  doctrine,  except  what  relates  to 
the  perfections  and  government  of  God,  the  depravity  of 
men,  the  mediation  of  Christ,  and  eternal  retributions. 
Nor  could  any  language  be  more  explicit.  And  lest  one 
form  of  expression  should  be  explained  away  as  figurative, 
numerous  forms  are  used,  which  go  to  explain  and  confirm 
each  other.  Nor,  when  we  have  spoken  of  the  number  of 
texts,  have  we  said  half  The  relations  among  the  various 
parts  of  this  great  system,  which  the  texts  explicitly  sup- 
port, and  which  cannot  stand  together  if  any  of  them  are 


164  SCRIPTURE  TESTIMONY,  &C. 

changed,  are  altogether  more  decisive  than  the  number  of 
^xts.  In  short,  if  the  doctrine  of  divine  efficiency  is  not 
revealed  in  the  Bible,  I  know  not  in  what  language  it 
could  have  been  revealed.  Nor  is  there  a  text  in  the 
whole  range  of  revelation  which  contradicts  it. 

And  after  all,  will  you  come  forward  and  say,  I  can 
look  far  enough  into  the  secrets  of  nature  to  see  that  di- 
vine efficiency  cannot  comport  with  human  freedom? 
Dare  you  say  this  in  the  face  of  several  hundred  texts,  as 
explicit  as  any  language  can  furnish,  and  supporting  rela- 
tions which  are  inseparably  jointed  together  ?  These  are 
the  real  parties  to  the  question :  several  hundred  texts  ar- 
rayed against  your  assumption,  and  your  assumption 
against  several  hundred  texts.  And  which  ought  to  pre- 
vail, let  God  and  the  universe  decide. 


CHAPTER    VIII. 

Sinless  Creatures  Dependent  for  Holiness. 

To  me  it  appears  as  impossible  for  God  to  make  a 
being  who  shall  act  independently  of  him,  as  to  make  a 
being  who  for  the  future  shall  be  self-existent.  He  can 
make  beings  whose  actions  shall  be  completely  their  own, 
so  as  to  deserve  praise  or  blame  ;  because  moral  good  and 
evil  do  not  lie  in  originating  but  in  performing.  This 
notion  of  communicated  independence  has  been  extended 
even  to  matter.  Boyle  and  Lord  Kames  thought  it  mors 
creditable  to  the  Author  of  nature  to  suppose  that  he  made 
the  znaterial  universe  to  go  alone  ;  that  he  gave  it  powers 
which  remained  after  he  withdrew  his  hand, — powers 
which,  in  their  continuance,  were  caused  by  him  and  not 
caused  by  him, — caused  by  him  in  being  given  at  first  as 
permanent  powers,  and  not  made  permanent  by  his  con- 
tinued action.  This  supposes  that  God  at  twelve  o'clock 
could  give  power  to  a  machine  to  go  alone  at  one.  But  if 
he  could  make  a  thing,  whether  a  being  or  a  power,  that 
would  exist  and  act  after  he  had  withdrawn,  he  could  make 
a  thing  which  for  the  time  to  come  would  be  self-existent ; 
and  yet  the  self-existence  would  be  communicated.  A  power 
derived  from  God  to  exist  without  God  ! 


166  SINLESS  CREATURES 

Brown  is  of  the  same  school.  He  has  laboured  to  prove 
that  the  material  universe,  after  deriving  its  existence 
and  laws  from  the  Creator,  performs  its  operations  without 
his  further  interposition ;  that  God  wills  its  operations  only 
as  he  formed  it  with  such  powers  and  lets  it  go  on  when  he 
could  suspend  its  laws ;  that  no  power  is  necessary  for  its 
preservation,  power  always  bearing  a  relation  to  some 
"  change."  But  what  can  that  existence  or  power  be 
which  God  does  not  support  ?  What  causes  it  to  be  this 
moment  ?  God  causes  a  thing  to  exist  the  first  moment, 
but  what  caused  it  to  exist  the  second  ?  Its  existence  one 
moment  was  no  cause  of  its  existing  another.  What 
causes  it  then  to  exist  now?  God,  by  a  previous  act  whose 
effect  continues  to  the  present  time,  but  not  by  a  present 
act.  But  what  makes  the  effect  continue  to  the  present 
time  if  God's  power  is  suspended  ?  Is  there  any  thing 
there  to  act  in  the  place  of  God  when  he  is  withdrawn  1 
any  thing  to  cause  the  effect  of  a  former  act  to  continue 
when  the  Actor  is  no  longer  there  ?  If  you  say,  God  im- 
parted to  the  thing  permanent  existence,  that  is  saying 
that  God  icilled  its  permanent  existence.  Now  as  God's 
existence  is  not  in  succession,  but  in  one  eternal  now,  we 
must  not  think  of  him  as  willing  a  thing  and  afterwards 
ceasing  to  will  it  while  the  thing  itself  remains.  What  he 
wills  he  wills  in  one  eternal  now.  And  if  at  the  creation 
he  willed  the  eternal  existence  and  laws  of  matter,  he 
never  ceases  to  will  the  same.  And  when  we  get  upon 
the  scale  of  creatures,  and  measure  over  successive  days 
and  hours  and  moments,  we  can  say  at  every  instant,  God 
now  wills  the  existence   and  laws  of  matter.     And  that 


DEPENDENT  FOR  HOLINESS.  167 

willing  is  all  we  know  of  his  causal  power.  It  was  a  ne- 
glect to  notice  this  mode  of  God's  existence,  which  led  these 
eminent  philosophers  to  distinguish  between  the  power 
which  gave  being  to  the  universe  and  its  laws  at  first,  and 
the  power  which  continues  their  existence. 

The  same  reasonings  will  prove  that  a  created  mind 
could  not  be  made  to  go  alone.  Without  the  application 
of  divine  efficiency  it  may  be  reasonably  bound,  and  there- 
fore may  have  that  power  which  is  the  basis  of  obligation  ; 
but  nothing  can  make  it  independent  in  its  operations : 
for  independent  action  implies  independent  attributes,  and 
independent  attributes  imply  independent  being,  and  inde- 
pendent being  would  be  communicated  self-existence. 

If  sinless  creatures  are  not  dependent  on  God  for  holi- 
ness, how  will  you  account  for  the  fall  of  any  ?  and  since 
some  have  fallen,  what  security  is  there  that  all  will  not 
apostatize  ?     Let  us  consider  this  matter. 

I  have  repeatedly  said  that  the  operations  of  the  facul- 
ties are  controlled  by  the  affections  and  outward  circum- 
stances,— outward  circumstances  throwing  in  motives 
adapted  to  the  existing  temper.  And  motives  adapted  to 
the  temper  and  brought  into  the  full  view  of  the  under- 
standing, will  infallibly  draw  forth  affections  agreeing  with 
the  state  of  the  heart.  For,  thus  presented  to  the  intel- 
lect and  thus  adapted  to  the  temper,  they  offer  to  the  mind 
the  greatest  apparent  good.  And  that  exhibition,  even  ac- 
cording to  Dr.  Whitby,  the  pride  of  Arminianism,  will 
certainly  control  the  heart  or  will.  These  are  his  words. 
"  To  say  that — the  greatest  good  proposed,  the  greatest 
evil  threatened,  when  equally  believed  and  reflected  on,  is 


168  SINLESS  CREATURES 

not  sufficient  to  engage  the  will  to  choose  the  good  and 
refuse  the  evil,  is  in  effect  to  say,  that  which  alone  doth 
move  the  will  to  choose  or  refuse,  is  not  sufficient  to  engage 
it  so  to  do  ;  which,  being  contradictory  to  itself,  must  of  ne- 
cessity be  false."*  Thus  while  the  heart  is  right  and  the 
mind  free,  proper  motives,  set  clearly  before  the  understand- 
ing, will  certainly  awaken  right  affections.  And  temptations 
to  sin  while  the  heart  is  right,  will  instantly  be  rejected. 
All  these  operations  are  voluntary  and  free  ;  yet  such  is  the 
indissoluble  connexion  between  understanding,  motives,  and 
affections.  How  then  can  a  holy  being  apostatize  ?  Not 
until  the  heart  ceases  to  be  inclined  to  fall  in  with  the  mo- 
tives which  moved  it  before.  That  cessation  cannot  be 
produced  by  good  motives,  and  before  it  takes  place  bad 
motives  cannot  operate.  It  cannot  therefore  be  the  effect 
of  motives.  It  must  result  from  some  influence,  or  some 
withdrawment  of  influence,  behind  the  scene.  If  it  results 
from  a  positive  influence,  God  must  be  the  efficient  cause 
of  sin  ;  if  it  results  from  the  withdrawment  of  an  influence, 
the  influence  withdrawn  was  that  which  before  inclined  the 
heart  to  holy  action  :  and  that  is  the  very  efficiency  for  which 
we  plead.  Without  resorting  to  efficiency  and  its  with- 
drawment, how  can  we  account  for  the  fall  of  holy  beings  ? 
How  even  on  the  principle  of  the  self-determining  power  ? 
The  whole  of  that  power,  according  to  Whitby,  consists 
in  an  ability  to  decide  whether  or  not  to  attend  to  and  be- 
lieve the  truth  presented  :t  but  while  the  heart  is  right,  the 
mind  will  certainly  give  attention  and  credence  to  the  truth 
exhibited.     A  change  of  heart,  or  of  the  causal  influence 

'  See  Introduction.  +  See  Introduction 


DEPENDENT  FOR  HOLINESS.  169 

which  acts  upon  the  heart,  must  therefore  be  the  first  thing  in 
the  fall  of  a  holy  being.  Without  this  change,  no  tempta- 
tion, no  delusive  speech  against  the  truth  of  God,  thrown  in 
m  a  moment  of  inattention,  could  work  this  fall.  While 
the  heart  is  overflowing  with  supreme  love  to  God,  no 
temptation  to  transgress  can  gain  the  ear ;  and  no  delusive 
speech  can  gain  a  moment's  credence  till  faith  in  God  has 
given  way.  You  seek  in  vain  for  the  origin  of  this  change 
in  ?notwes  bearing  upon  a  heart  warm  with  the  love  of  God. 
The  heart  must  first  degenerate  before  the  motives  can 
touch  it.  The  cause  of  all  the  causes  must  begin  its 
action  here.  Dominant  love  would  prevent  the  evil  from 
beginning  in  the  decay  of  attention  or  of  faith,  or  in  any 
obliquity  in  the  views  or  decisions  of  the  intellect.  The 
habit  of  love  itself,  or  the  propensity  to  love,  must  fail, 
before  any  thing  in  the  mind  or  in  outward  temptations 
can  take  hold  of  the  heart  to  debase  it.  The  first  thing 
to  be  done  is  to  dry  up  the  fountain  of  that  love,  which 
no  mere  faculties  or  motives  will  ever  accomplish.  That 
can  be  done  only  by  the  withdrawment  of  the  influence 
which  produced  it.  Therefore  if  God  has  no  eflicient 
influence  to  withdraw,  there  is  no  accounting  for  the  fall 
of  a  holy  being. 

This  is  exactly  the  argument  by  which  I  attempted  to 
prove  that  no  faculties  or  motives,  without  efficient  power, 
will  convert  supreme  enmity  into  the  supreme  love  of  God. 
The  only  difference  in  the  two  cases  is,  that  inherent  self- 
love  will  rise  up  into  sin  upon  the  mere  withdrawment  of 
divine  influence,  whereas  there  is  nothing  in  the  totally 

15 


170  SINLESS  CREATURES 

depraved  sinner  to  rise  up  into  the  love  of  God  without  his 
positive  efficiency. 

The  conclusion  to  which  we  come  is,  that  the  fall  of 
Adam  and  of  the  angels  furnishes  strong  proof  that  a 
divine  influence  was  withdrawn  which  had  supported  their 
love.  But  influence  or  no  influence,  they  fell.  And  if 
they  had  not  been  kept  by  divine  efficiency,  neither  are 
the  inhabitants  of  heaven  now  kept.  And  if  some  fell, 
thus  unsupported,  what  can  prevent  them  all  from  falling? 
What  makes  it  certain  that  Gabriel  will  not  apostatize  ? 
If  you  say,  God  forekno\^•s  that  he  will  not,  foreknowledge 
finds  a  thing  certain,  but  does  not  make  it  certain.  How 
comes  it  then  to  be  certain  that  Gabriel  will  persevere  ?  Dr. 
Fitch  answers,  "  We  who  hold  to  the  defectibility  of  Ga- 
briel and  his.  need  of  the  guards  of  God  for  protection  and 
strength,  would  say,  that  now  the  smoke  of  torment,  con- 
tinually ascending  from  the  everlasting  pit, — so  fills  his 
heart  with  fear  and  reverence  ;  and  the  Lamb  that  is  in  the 
midst  of  the  throne,  with  the  prints  of  crucifixion  he  bore, 
and  the  acclamations  of  the  ransomed  for  their  deliverance, 
so  fills  his  heart  with  love  to  the  e.xcellence  of  his  Maker ; 
that  his  holy  purpose  of  serving  God  is  exalted  and  con- 
firmed beyond  all  approach  of  prevailing  temptation."* 
Then  God  exercises  absolute  dominion  by  motives ;  and 
then  he  could  have  exerted  the  same  over  all  his  creatures 
and  effectually  prevented  sin.  But  if  he  does  not  exercise 
absolute  dominion  by  motives,  all  these  new  motives  arising 
from  the  punishment  of  sin  and  the  work  of  redemption 

'  Christian  Spectator  for  1832.  p.  638. 


DEPENDENT  FOR  HOLINESS.  171 

cannot,  absolutely  secure  the  perseverance  of  Gabriel,  and 
all  heaven  may  yet  apostatize.  At  any  rate  we  have  here 
offered  to  us  the  glorious  effects  which  God  has  pressed 
out  of  sin.  According  to  this  statement,  the  entire  influ- 
ence which  supports  his  moral  empire  over  all  heaven,  and 
by  a  parity  of  reasoning  over  the  whole  universe,  to  eter- 
nity, is  educed  from  the  consequences  of  sin. 

But  you  turnupon  me  and  say,  Have  you  not  asserted 
such  a  dominion  by  motives,  when  you  maintained  that 
holy  beings,  while  continuing  holy,  must  be  governed  by 
holy  motives  ?  While  continuing  lioly :  that  is  the  very 
effect  to  be  accounted  for.  The  question  is,  do  motives 
cause  tliem  to  continue  inclined  to  fall  in  with  motives? 
This  I  deny,  and  ascribe  the  effect  to  the  power  of  God. 
If  motives  have  an  absolute  dominion,  they  mould  the 
heart  by  their  own  power,  whether  adapted  to  its  present 
temper  or  not.  This  I  have  no  wliere  asserted  but  uni- 
formly denied. 

There  are  but  three  cases  in  which  we  have  had  an  op- 
portunity ta  contemplate  the  perfectly  holy  among  crea- 
tures. One  is  that  of  the  holy  angels  and  "  the  spirits  of 
just  men  made  perfect ;"  the  second  is  that  of  our  first  pa- 
rents ;  the  third  is  that  of  the  man  Christ  Jesus.  All  these 
cases  are  in  our  favour. 

It  is  certain  that  the  angels  and  glorified  saints  are  con- 
firmed ;  confirmed  after  a  period  of  probation,  and  there- 
fore as  a  reward;  (in  the  former  case  as  a  legal,  in  the 
latter  as  a  gracious  reward;)  and  of  course  confirmed  by 
God      After  the  exaltation  of  Christ  to  be  head  over  "  all 


172  SINLESS  CREATURES 

principality  and  power,"  we  read  of  "  the  elect  angels."* 
And  if  angels,  as  the  reward  of  their  obedience  during 
probation,  are  enrolled  among  the  elect,  they  must  be  en- 
rolled by  God,  who  therefore  stands  pledged  to  keep  them 
from  falling.  And  how  can  he  effectually  keep  them  from 
falling,  but  either  by  efficient  power  or  the  absolute  do- 
mniion  of  motives?  If  these  two  ways  of  preservation  are 
given  up,  the  certainty  of  their  perseverance  must  be 
abandoned.  If  our  brethren  deny  the  absolute  dominion 
of  motives,  and  admit  the  confirmation  of  "  the  elect  an- 
gels," they  must  own  that  the  angels  are  kept  m  holiness 
by  the  efficient  power  of  God.  That  glorified  saints  are 
also  confirmed,  is  evident  from  their  ordhiation  "to  eternal 
life,"  and  from  the  winding  up  of  the  final  scene :  "  These 
shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment,  but  the  right- 
eous into  life  eternal."!  And  if  they  are  eternally  con- 
firmed as  a  covenanted  recompense,  awarded  to  them  by  a 
public  and  most  solemn  judicial  sentence,  then  God,  in  the 
highest  possible  degree,  is  pledged  to  keep  them  forever 
from  falling.  And  if  he  does  not  exercise  absolute  do- 
minion by  motives,  he  must  eternally  keep  them  by  effi- 
cient power. 

If  you  say,  the  dominion  of  motives  may  be  absolute  in 
heaven,  and  nothing  but  human  depravity  prevents  it  on 
earth ;  you  have  no  right  to  say  this  after  denying,  or  even 
doubting,  the  power  of  God  to  prevent  sin.  For  if  God 
can  by  motives  exercise  such  a  dominion  over  spotless 
beings,  he  could  have  prevented  spotless  beings  from  falling 

"  t   Tim  .5.  21.  t  Mat.  2:3.  46      Acts  13.  48. 


DEPENDENT  FOR  HOLINESS.  173 

It  is  said  by  our  brethren  that  Adam  was  not  holy  when 
he  was  first  created  ;  that  he  was  made  only  with  faculties, 
and  became  holy  at  once  by  the  right  exercise  of  them. 
As  I  am  now  standing  on  the  exercise  ground,  I  am  will- 
ing to  allow  that  he  was  not  holy  till  he  exercised  his  fa- 
culties. But  was  it  under  the  influence  of  divine  efficiency 
that  he  exercised  them  aright  ?  If  so,  then  God  made  him 
holy  at  first.  And  what  do  we  hear  ?  "  Lo  this  only  have 
I  found,  that  God  hath  made  man  upright,  but  they  have 
sought  out  many  inventions."  God  made  man  upright. 
God  made  Adam  upright.  Do  we  want  any  more  ?  But 
let  us  go  to  the  creation  itself  "  And  God  said,  Let  us 
make  man  in  our  own  image,  after  our  likeness. — So 
God  created  man  in  his  own  image  ;  in  the  image  of  God 
created  he  him  :  male  and  female  created  he  them.  And 
God  blessed  them  and  said  unto  them,  Be  fruitful  and  mul- 
tiply and  replenish  the  earth."  Now  I  assert  that  creating' 
them  in  the  image  of  God,  though  it  included  intellect 
and  knowledge,  and  dominion  if  you  please,  was  making 
them  holy.  Did  God  bless  them  before  they  were  holy  ?  And 
yet  the  historian  passes  from  their  creation  in  God's  image 
to  the  benediction  without  an  intermediate  word.  This 
close  connexion  implies  that  their  creation  in  the  image  of 
God  was  itself  a  preparation  for  the  blessing.  And  if  there 
could  be  any  doubt,  the  language  of  the  apostle  would  re- 
move it.  "Ye  have — put  on  the  new  man,  which  is  renewed 
in  knowledge  af\er  the  image  of  him  that  created  him."* 
If  the  new  creation  in  the  image  of  God  makes  men  holy, 
the  first  creation  in  the  image  of  God  made  Adam  holy. 

^  Gen.  1.  26,  27      Eccl.  7.  29.     Col.  3.  9,  10. 
15* 


174  SINLESS  CREATURES 

In  regard  to  the  man  Christ  Jesus,  the  Spirit  was 
poured  upon  him  for  various  purposes  ;  to  anoint  him  to 
the  several  offices  of  Prophet,  Priest,  and  King,  and  to 
communicate  wisdom  and  hohness.  All  tliese  purposes 
are  expressed  in  a  single  passage.  "  The  Spirit  of  the 
Lord  shall  rest  upon  him  ;  the  Spirit  of  wisdom  and  un- 
derstanding, the  Spirit  of  counsel  and  might,  the  Spirit  of 
knowledge  and  of  the  fear  of  the  Lord;  aiid  shall  make 
him  of  quick  understanding  in  the  fear  of  the  Lord ;  and 
he  shall  not  judge  after  the  sight  of  his  eyes,  neither  re- 
prove after  the  hearing  of  his  ears;  but  with  righteousness 
shall  he  judge,  and  reprove  with  equity. — And  righteous- 
ness shall  be  the  girdle  of  his  loins,  and  faithfulness  the 
girdle  of  his  reins."  Here  is  the  knowledge  of  the  Pro- 
phet, the  holiness  of  the  Priest,  and  the  power  and  wisdom 
of  the  righteous  King  and  Judge,  all  communicated  by 
the  unction  of  the  Spirit. 

1.  The  Prophet  should  have  both  knowledge  and  the 
gift  of  utterance  ;  and  both  were  communicated  to  Jesus 
by  the  Spirit.  Christians  of  that  day  had  an  unction 
which  taught  them  "  all  things  ;"  and  it  seems  to  have 
been  this  inspiring  Spirit  of  knowledge  that  was  meant 
when  it  was  said,  "  He  whom  the  Father  hath  sent  speak- 
eth  the  words  of  God  ;  for  God  givetli  not  the  Spirit  by 
measure  unto  him."  "  The  Lord  God  hath  given  me  the 
tongue  of  the  learned,  that  I  should  know  how  to  speak  a 
word  in  season  to  him  that  is  weary."  "  The  Spirit  of 
the  Lord  God  is  upon  me,  because  the  Lord  hath  anointed 
me  to  preach  good  tidings  unto  the  meek." 

2.  As  the  Jewish  priests,  at  their  consecration,  were 


DEPENDENT  FOR  HOLINESS.  175 

washed  with  water  and  anointed  with  oil ;  so  Christ,  when 
set  apart  to  the  priestly  office,  was  baptised  by  John  and 
anointed  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  expressly  at  the  age  at  which 
by  law  the  priests  had  been  consecrated.  To  make  the 
sacrifice  of  this  Priest  expressive  of  God's  unchangeable 
resolution  to  support  his  law  by  executing  its  penalty  on 
future  offenders,  he  must  be  dear  to  the  Father,  and  must 
therefore  be  rendered  dear  by  a  course  of  filial  obedience. 
Hence  that  ordination  to  the  priesthood,  (which  was  in 
fact  his  introduction  to  the  public  character  of  a  Son,) 
seems  to  be  called  his  generation.  "  No  man  taketh  this 
honour  unto  himself,  but  he  that  is  called  of  God,  as  was 
Aaron.  So  also  Christ  glorified  not  himself  to  be  made  a 
high  priest,  but  he  that  said  unto  him,  Thou  art  my  Son, 
to-day  have  I  begotten  thee.  As  he  saith  also  in  another 
place,  Thou  art  a  priest  forever  after  the  order  of  Melchi- 
sedec."  On  that  occasion  therefore  the  voice  from  heaven 
pronounced  him  the  "  beloved  Son." 

3.  By  the  same  unction  he  received  the  power  of  a 
King  and  the  wisdom  of  a  righteous  Judge,  an|d  was  visibly 
appointed  to  dominion  over  a  numerous  seed,  and  to  the 
inheritance  as  "  the  First  born  among  many  brethren." 
"With  my  holy  oil  have  I  anointed  him.; — He  shall  cry 
unto  me,  Thou  art  my  Father. — I  will  make  him  my  First 
born. — His  seed  also  will  I  make  to  endure  forever  and 
his  throne  as  the  days  of  heaven."  The  very  unction 
which  he  received  when  he  came  up  out  of  Jordan,  gave 
him  power  to  redeem  his  subjects  by  baptising  them  with 
the  Holy  Ghost,  and  power  to  cast  out  devils  and  to  work 
all  his  miracles.     "  He  that  sent  me  to  baptise  with  water, 


176  SINLESS  CREATURES 

the  same  said  unto  me,  Upon  whom  thou  slialt  see  tlie 
Spirit  descending  and  remaining  on  him,  the  same  is  he 
which  baptiseth  with  the  Holy  Ghost."  "God  anointed 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  with  the  Holy  Ghost  and  with  power  ; 
who  went  about  doing  good  and  healing  all  that  were  op- 
pressed of  the  devil."  He  "  cast  out  devils"  "  by  the 
Spirit  of  God."  From  God  also  he  received  the  wisdom 
and  integrity  of  a  righteous  Judge.  "Give — thy  right- 
eousness unto  the  King's  Son.  He  shall  judge  thy  people 
with  righteousness  and  thy  poor  with  judgment." 

4.  Means  and  the  Spirit  were  both  necessary  to  make 
that  human  being  holy  and  to  keep  him  holy.  To  begin 
with  means.  "Behold  a  virgin  shall  conceive  and  bear  a 
son,  and  shall  call  his  name  Immanuel.  Butter  and 
honey  shall  he  eat,  that  he  may  know  to  refuse  the  evil 
and  choose  the"*good."  His  habits  of  virtue  were  confirm- 
ed like  those  of  another  man.  ''  Though  he  were  a  Son 
yet  learned  he  obedience  by  the  things  which  he  suffered  : 
and  being  made  perfect,  [by  these  confirming  trials  of  his 
love  and  obedience,]  he  became  the  author  of  eternal  salva- 
tion unto  all  them  that  obey  him."  He  needed  the  Spirit  too. 
•'  The  Lord  God — wakeneth  morning  by  morning,  he 
wakeneth  my  ear  to  hear  as  the  learned.  The  Lord  God 
hath  opened  my  ear  and  I  teas  not  rebellious,  neither  turned 
away  back.  [To  open  the  ear  was  a  well  known  figure, 
denoting,  to  render  obedient.]  I  gave  my  back  to  the 
smiters  and  my  cheeks  to  them  that  plucked  off  the  hair : 
I  hid  not  my  face  from  shame  and  spitting."  "  Be  not 
thou  far  from  me,  O  Lord :  O  my  strength,  haste  thee  to 
help  me."     "  My  God  shall  be  my  strength."     Of  that 


DEPENDENT   FOR  HOLINESS.  177 

wondrous  stranger  of  Nazareth  it  was  said,  "  And  the 
child  grew  and  waxed  strong  in  spirit,  [in  the  margin,  "  by 
the  Spirit,"]  filled  with  wisdom,  and  the  grace  of  God  was 
upon  ?um."  During  the  period  of  his  youth,  "  Jesus  in- 
creased in  wisdom  and  stature  and  in  favour  with  God  and 
man."  And  when  he  came  to  make  that  offering  about 
which  the  Spirit  of  prophesy  had  said,  "  The  Lord  God 
hath  opened  my  ear  and  I  was  not  rebellious,"  did  he  go 
alone  ?  did  the  man  achieve  it  all  in  his  own  independent 
strength  ?  No,  it  was  the  Spirit  that  made  his  life  so  pure 
that  his  offering  was  without  a  spot.  "  Who,  through  the 
eternal  Spirit,  offered  himself  without  spot  to  God."* 

As  the  affections  of  that  holy  man  were  thus  indubi- 
tably influenced  by  the  Spirit,  the  only  question  is,  whether 
the  influence  was  efficient  or  merely  by  motives.  Accord- 
ing to  our  brethren,  the  only  thing  which  renders  the  Spirit 
necessary  for  men,  is  bad  affections ;  and  the  chief  obstruct- 
ion to  the  empire  of  truth  arising  from  bad  affections,  lies 
in  their  going  after  other  objects  and  holding  the  attention 
from  the  truth  :  to  which  they  add  the  power  of  habit ; 
which,  from  the  associations  existing,  not  only  among  our 
ideas,  but,  according  to  Reid  and  Stewart,  among  all  the 
operations  of  the  mind,  and  from  the  increasing  facility 
with  which  these  associations  are  formed  and  all  these  ope- 
rations are  carried  on,  renders  the  exercise  of  holy  or  sin- 

*Num.  4.  47.  Ps.  22.  19.  and  72.  1,  2.  and  89.  20—29.  Isai. 
7.  14,  15.  and  11.  1—4.  and  49.  5.  and  50.  4—6.  and  61.  1.  Mat.  3. 
16,  17.  and  12.  28.  Luke  2.  40,  52.  and  3.  23.  John  1.  33.  and  3. 
34.  Acts.  10,  38.  Rom.  8.  29.  Heb.  5.  4—9.  and  9.  14.  1  John 
2.  20,  27. 


178       SINLESS  CREATURES  DEPENDENT  FOR  HOLINESS. 

ful  affections  more  and  more  easy  and  certain.  They  liold 
that  truth  throws  so  attractive  a  light  upon  reason  and  self- 
love,  that  if  the  attention  can  be  fastened  to  it,  the  mind 
will  be  likely  to  yield  to  its  influence  ;  at  any  rate,  that  the 
Spirit  can  do  no  more  than  to  present  truth  in  so  clear  and 
atfecting  a  light  as  to  arrest"  the  roving  attention  and  fasten 
it  to  spiritual  objects.  Now  certainly  Jesus  had  no  such 
rambling  attention  which  needed  to  be  brought  back  to  di- 
vine things.  That  only  operation  which  our  brethren  as- 
cribe to  the  Spirit,  and  which  depravity  alone  renders  ne- 
cessary, could  not  have  been  wrought  in  this  instance.  If 
the  sanctifying  Spirit  moved  upon  that  mind,  it  must 
have  been  in  a  way  and  for  a  purpose  wholly  out  of  the 
scope  of  their  plan,  The  single  fact  therefore  that  the 
sanctifying  Spirit  moved  upon  Jesus,  wholly  breaks  up 
their  theory,  and  forever  settles  the  point  that  the  office  of 
the  Spirit  is  not  merely  to  fix  the  attention  of  a  fallen 
creature  upon  truth,  but  to  move  even  the  holy  by  effectual 
power, 


CHAPTER    IX 


God's  Power  to  Prevent  Sin. 


If  God  can  control  the  mind  either  by  efficiency  or  by 
motives,  he  can  prevent  sin  :  for  if  he  can  control  one  mind 
he  can  control  all  minds.  If  then  you  deny  that  he  could 
have  prevented  sin,  you  deny  both  his  efficiency  and  the 
absolute  dominion  of  motives.  The  writers  in  the  Chris- 
tian Spectator  must  therefore  be  ranked  among  the  deniers 
of  both  ways  of  control,  because  they  deny  God's  power  to' 
prevent  sin.  For  altliough  now  and  then  they  qualify  the 
denial  by  saying  that  the  inability  is  only  possible  or  pro- 
bable or  highly  probable;  y6t  men  of  their  character  would 
not  fill  the  world  with  arguments  in  support  of  a  point,  of 
sach  unequalled  solemnity,  about  which  they  had  a  seriou? 
doubt.  Besides,  all  their  theories  respecting  regeneration 
and  sanctification  and  election  and  predestination  and  mo- 
ral agency,  fall  at  once  if  God  has  such  an  absolute  control 
over  the  mind  as  is  implied  in  a  power  to  prevent  sin. 
They  say  the  mind  turns  itself  in  view  of  motives,  and 
often  resists  ail  the  inducements  which  God  can  bring. 
They  make  election  and  predestination  to  consist  in  a 
mere  determination  to  bring  forward  such  creatures  and 
means,  with  a  foresight  of  the  decisions  of  the  self-deter- 


180  god's  power. 

mining  power.  They  deny  that  moral  agency  can  con- 
sist with  any  mode  of  absolute  control.  All  these  theories 
flatly  contradict  God's  power  to  prevent  sin.  If  then  I 
prove  that  God  could  have  prevented  sin,  it  sweeps  away 
their  whole  system  respecting  predestination  and  election 
and  regeneration  and  sanctification  and  moral  agency. 

One  thing  must  be  distinctly  noted  in  the  outset.  If 
God  could  not  have  prevented  sin  in  all  worlds  and  ages, 
he  cannot  prevent  sin  in  any  world  or  age,  or  in  any  crea- 
ture at  any  time,  except  by  preventing  the  particular  occa- 
sion and  temptation.  If  God  could  not  h9.ve  prevented  sin 
in  the  universe,  he  cannot  prevent  believers  from  fatally 
falling  ;  he  cannot  prevent  Gabriel  and  Paul  from  sinking 
at  once  into  devils,  and  heaven  from  turning  into  a  hell. 
And  were  he  to  create  new  races  to  fill  the  vacant  seats, 
they  might  turn  to  devils  as  fast  as  he  created  them,  in  spite 
of  any  thing  that  he  could  do  short  of  destroying  their  mo- 
ral agency.  He  is  liable  to  be  defeated  in  all  his  designs, 
and  to  be  as  miserable  as  he  is  benevolent.  This  is  infi- 
nitely the  gloomiest  idea  that  was  ever  thrown  upon  the 
world.  It  is  gloomier  then  hell  itself  For  this  involves 
only  the  destruction  of  a  part,  but  that  involves  the  wretch- 
edness of  God  and  his  whole  creation.  And  how  awfully 
gloomy  as  it  respects  the  prospects  of  individual  believers. 
You  have  no  security  that  you  shall  stand  an  hour.  And  even 
if  you  get  to  heaven,  you  have  no  certainty  of  remaining 
there  a  day.  All  is  doubt  and  sepulchral  gloom.  And 
where  is  the  glory  of  God  ?  where  the  transcendent  glory 
of  raising  to  spiritual  life  a  world  dead  in  trespasses  and 


TO  PREVENT  SIN.  181 

sins?  where  the  glory  of  swaying  an  undivided  sceptre, 
and  doing  his  whole  pleasure  "in  the  army  of  heaven  and 
among  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth"? 

I  know  of  but  two  things  which  can  be  said  to  avoid 
these  fearful  consequences.  One  is,  that  God  foresaw 
from  the  beginning  that  the  saints  on  earth  and  the  pre- 
sent and  future  inhabitants  of  heaven  would  not  apostatize ; 
the  other  is,  that  they  are  unchangeably  kept  by  a  view  of 
the  punishments  of  sin  and  the  work  of  redemption.  As 
to  the  first,  God's  foreseeing  a  thing  to  be  certain  does  not 
make  it  certain,  but  implies  that  it  is  already  certain.  If 
you  say,  God  would  not  create  any  who  he  foresaw  would, 
after  such  an  exhibition  of  justice  and  mercy,  apostatize 
in  heaven,  nor  any  who  on  earth  would  fall  away  after 
being  induced  to  turn  from  sin  to  God  ;  this  is  sup- 
posing, without  any  authority  whatever,  that  the  perse- 
verance of  the  inhabitants  of  heaven  and  earth  depends 
wholly  on  their  being  those  identical  creatures  rather 
than  others  of  the  same  mould,  or  of  the  same  race  with  a 
somewhat  different  constitution.  If  you  suppose  that  God 
foresaw  that  those  identical  creatures  would  indepen- 
dently persevere  rather  than  other  creatures  of  exactly  the 
same  mould  and  in  the  same  circumstances,  you  suppose 
the  foresight  of  an  effect  without  a  cause,  and  certainly 
an  effect  not  caused  by  him.  And  it  is  inconceivable  how 
God  should  foresee  an  event  nowise  dependent  on  his  will. 
It  is  said  by  our  brethren  that,  antecedent  in  the  order  of 
nature  to  his  decree  even  to  create,  and  as  the  ground  of 
that  decree,  God  foresaw  that  if  he  brought  forward  such  a 
system  of  government  and  grace,  such  and  such  would  be 
16 


182  god's  power 

the  decisions  of  the  self-determining  power  in  different  ni' 
dividuals.  The  certainty  of  those  decisions  thus  condi- 
tionally foreseen,  I  will  call  a  conditional  certainty,  which 
was  afterwards  made  absolute  by  the  decree  to  bring  for- 
ward the  system.  Now  as  that  conditional  certainty  exist- 
ed anterior  to  any  decree  of  God  even  to  create,  and  there- 
fore was  in  no  sense  dependent  on  his  will,  how  could  he 
foresee  it  ?  He  could  indeed  foresee  the  result  of  any  sup- 
posed laws  by  him  impressed  on  matter  or  mind  ;  for  it 
would  be  contemplating  the  exact  operations  of  causes  ap- 
pointed to  work  in  a  determinate  manner :  and  to  suppose 
mind  to  operate  by  fixed  laws,  is  not  supposing  the  mecha- 
nism of  matter  transferred  to  the  soul,  but  only  a  rational  ad- 
herence to  motives  in  accordance  with  the  free  desires  of 
the  mind.  If  the  movements  of  created  minds  do  depend  on 
God's  will,  then  certainly  he  cannot  foresee  them  any  fur- 
ther than  he  determines  them.  Here  is  a  world  to  be 
created.  None  but  God  can  create  it.  How  can  he  cer- 
tainly know  that  it  will  be  created  if  he  has  not  determined 
to  create  it  ?  But  the  supposition  is,  that  he  foresees  the 
future  operations  of  an  efficient  cause  wholly  independent 
of  him.  I  say  future,  for  though  God  exists  in  one  eter- 
nal now,  yet  these  operations  of  created  minds  Avere  not 
eternal.  The  theory  is,  that  he  foresaw  what  those  minds 
would  independently  do  if  he  made  them  ;  a  foresight  an- 
terior, in  the  order  of  nature,  to  all  his  purposes,  and  the 
very  ground  of  the  decree  even  to  create  ;  and  yet  this 
conditional  certainty,  thus  wholly  independent  of  his  will, 
he  distinctly  foresaw.  If  this  is  not  venturing  into  the 
unknown  without  chart  or  compass,  I  know  not  what  is. 


TO  PREVENT  SIN.  183 

All  that  we  are  authorized  to  believe  concerning  the  divine 
prescience  is,  that  "  known  unto  God  are  all  iiis  works 
from  the  beginning  of  the  world,"  and  that  there  is  a  close 
connexion  between  "  the  determinate  counsel  and  fore- 
knowledge of  God."*  All  the  rest  is  a  dream.  He  is 
omniscient  within  his  own  dominions  :  but  if  there  could 
be  a  world  beyond  the  bounds  of  his  empire,  how  does 
reason  or  Scripture  intimate  that  he  could  know  that  ? 
How,  more  than  you  can  know  what  people  will  do  in 
another  world  ? 

If  you  suppose  that  the  perseverance  of  saints  and  an- 
gels depends  on  some  peculiarity  of  constitution  by  which 
they  are  distinguished  from  other  beings  of  the  same  race, 
how  does  this  effectual  influence  of  a  constitution  passively 
received,  any  more  than  efficiency  itself,  comport  with 
freedom  1  God  gave  them  a  peculiar  constitution  which 
ensured  their  eternal  perseverance.  And  are  you  sure 
that  you  mean  less  or  more  by  that  constitution  than 
others  do  by  a  disposition,  which  you  reject  as  inconsist- 
ent with  moral  agency  ? 

Take  now  the  other  supposition  ;  that  the  holy  crea- 
tures of  both  worlds  are  unfailingly  kept  by  a  view  of 
the  punishments  of  sin  and  the  wonders  of  redemption. 
But  this  is  the  absolute  dominion  of  motives.  And  if  God 
can  exercise  such  a  dominion,  why  could  he  not  have  pre- 
vented sin  ?  You  may  say,  without  those  consequences  of 
gin, — punishment  and  redemption, — there  were  not  motives 
enough  to  secure  the  perpetual  holiness  of  the  universe  or  of 

*  Acts  2.  23.  and  15.  18. 


184 


GOD  S  POWER 


any  of  its  parts.  Then  you  have  abandoned  your  favourite 
theory,  that  hohness  in  every  case  is  better  for  the  universe 
than  sin  in  its  stead.  And  when  you  have  given  up  that  no- 
tion, you  may  perhaps  discover  a  reason  why  God  permitted 
sin  when  he  could  have  prevented  it.  If  God  can  keep  saints 
and  angels  eternally  holy  by  motives,  why  did  he  not  keep 
the  universe  eternally  holy  by  motives  ?  If  you  say,  the 
motives  were  not  furnished  till  punishment  and  redemption 
brought  them  forth,  then  you  say,  that  some  good  effects 
have  followed  from  sin  which  could  not  have  existed  with- 
out it :  and  then  sin  in  some  cases  is  better  for  the  universe 
than  holiness  in  its  stead.  While,  to  disprove  God's  volun- 
tary permission  of  sin,  you  continue  to  say  that  holiness  in 
all  cases  is  better  for  the  universe  than  sin  in  its  stead, 
you  may  not  say  that  the  consequences  of  sin  ha\e  furnish- 
ed stronger  motives  to  holiness  than  could  have  existed 
without  it :  and  therefore  you  may  not  plead  that  God,  by 
motives,  can  eternally  keep  sin  from  heaven,  and  yet  by 
motives  could  not  have  kept  sin  from  the  universe.  My 
own  opinion  is,  that  by  mere  motives  he  could  not  have 
done  the  one  and  cannot  do  the  other.  Certainly  it  is  not  by 
mere  motives  that  believers  on  earth  are  kept.  The  same 
motives  are  urged  upon  other  men  without  effect.  Hell 
thunders  and  Calvary  weeps,  and  they  march  on  to  death. 
You  say,  because  they  do  not  believe.  Aye,  and  one  rea- 
son why  they  do  not  believe  is,  that  faith  "  is  the  gift  of 
God."  If  he  keeps  the  saints  by  motives,  why  by  motives 
could  he  not  have  prevented  sin  1  And  if  he  does  not  keep 
them  by  motives,  he  must  keep  them  by  efficient  power. 
There  is  no  other  alternative.     You  must  give  up  the  doc- 


TO  PREVENT  SIN.  185 

trine  of  perseverance  or  admit  that  God  could  have  pre- 
vented sin.  You  must  give  up  the  doctrine  of  perseverance 
or  resort  either  to  that  of  efficiency  or  an  absolute  control 
by  motives.  If  neither  of  these  is  admitted,  what  chance 
is  there  for  any  on  earth  or  in  heaven  to  stand  ?  Satan 
fell  from  perfect  holiness ;  Adam  fell  from  perfect  holiness : 
what  should  keep  believers  from  falling  from  imperfect 
holiness,  in  a  world  full  of  temptations,  and  with  all  the 
influence  of  former  habits  bearing  upon  them  ?  How 
comes  it  then  to  pass  that  every  one  of  them,  without  a 
single  exception,  perseveringly  yields  to  motives  which 
cannot  control  others  ?  How  comes  it  to  pass  that  God  is 
so  sure  of  this  control  over  them,  that  he  firmly  covenants 
with  Christ  and  the  Church  to  keep  them  all  ?  Is  it  be- 
cause none  but  the  less  stubborn  yield  at  first  ?  But  what 
is  stubbornness  on  your  plan  but  the  strength  of  present 
passions  ?  And  have  not  the  strong  passions  of  a  Manas- 
seh  and  a  Saul  of  Tarsus  and  a  dying  thief  yielded,  while 
mildness  has  died  in  sin  ?  Have  not  the  most  unlikely  sub- 
mitted, while  the  children  of  the  pious,  brought  up  in  the 
midst  of  means,  have  died  in  profligacy  ?  Do  you  say,  God 
keeps  bad  motives  from  those  he  means  to  keep  ?  Then 
he  could  have  kept  bad  motives  from  all  his  creatures  and 
prevented  sin.  But  Christians  live  every  day  in  the  midst 
of  temptations.  It  is  indeed  said,  "  There  hath  no  temp- 
tation taken  you  but  such  as  is  common  to  man  :  but  God 
is  faithful  who  will  not  suffer  you  to  be  tempted  above  that 
ye  are  able  ;  but  will  with  the  temptation  also  make  a  way 
to  escape,  that  ye  may  be  able  to  bear  it :"  but  the  safety 
lies  in  his  making  a  way  to  escape,  which  I  understand 
16* 


186  fiOD'S  POWER 

to  be  by  efficient  power  in  connexion  with  his  protecting 
providence. 

Upon  your  plan  there  are  two  facts  wholly  unaccounted 
for  :  first,  that  all  the  individuals  who  were  given  to  Christ, 
and  only  those,  are  induced  at  first  to  submit ;  and  secondly, 
that  every  one  of  them  without  exception  perseveres.  As- 
sign any  sufficient  reason  for  these  facts,  and  see  if  the  same 
might  not  have  kept  sin  out  of  the  universe.  You  must 
relinquish  your  theory  respecting  the  prevention  of  sin,  or 
give  up  the  doctrine  of  perseverance ;  and  then  there  is 
no  certainty  that  a  creature  in  any  world  will  continue  to 
be  holy. 

You  say,  the  conversion  and  perseverance  of  the  elect 
were  certain  because  God  foresaw  them ;  and  they  were 
decreed  in  the  very  purpose  to  bring  forward  such  a  sys- 
tem of  government  and  grace  with  a  foreknowledge  that 
the  self-determining  power  would  yield,  and  continue  to 
yield,  to  the  motives ;  and  the  promises  to  Christ  and  the 
Church  were  only  engagements  to  send  the  means, 
added  to  predictions  of  what  the  self-determining  power 
would  do.  This  is  the  explanation  of  Dr  Fitch,  put  into 
my  own  language.  And  this  will  explain  the  apparent 
contradiction  in  Dr  Taylor's  account  of  the  predestination 
of  sin  when  God  was  heartily  unwilling  that  it  should 
take  place.  He  believes  "  that  the  eternal  purposes  of 
God  extend  to  all  actual  events,  sin  not  excepted."  And 
yet  he  says,  "  I  do  not  believe  that  sin  can  be  proved  to  be 
the  necessary  means  of  the  greatest  good,  and  that  as  such 
God  prefers  it  on  the  whole  to  holiness  in  its  stead. — But 
1  do  believe — that  it  mav  be  true  that  God,  all  things  con- 


TO  PREVENT  SIN.  167 

sidered,  prefers  holiness  to  sin  in  all  instances  in  which 
the  latter  takes  place, — though  for  wise  and  good  reasons 
he  permits,  or  does  not  prevent,  the  existence  of  sin."* 
That  is,  by  creating  moral  agents,  he  permitted  what  he 
could  not  prevent  but  by  refusing  to  create  them.  And 
he  decreed  their  sin  by  deciding  to  create  them  and  to 
place  them  under  law.  And  so  he  decreed  the  regenera- 
tion, perseverance,  and  salvation  of  the  elect,  by  determin- 
ing to  create  them  and  to  place  them  under  means,  (in- 
cluding the  illuminating  Spirit,)  to  which  he  foresaw  that 
the  self-determining  power  would  yield.  And  his  covenant 
with  Christ  and  the  Church  was  a  promise  to  do  just  that 
and  no  more. 

On  this  statement  I  remark  first,  that  God's  foreseeinor 
the  certainty  of  their  conversion  and  perseverance,  did  not 
make  these  events  certain.  This  theory  therefore  leaves 
the  facts  as  unaccounted  for  as  before.  Secondly,  their 
conversion  and  perseverance,  being  wrought  by  a  power 
independent  of  God,  could  not,  in  any  conceivable  way, 
have  been  foreseen.  Thirdly,  for  God,  in  his  solemn  cove- 
nants with  Christ  and  the  Church,  to  promise  to  do  what 
really  was  to  be  done  by  another,  and  then  to  assume  the 
praise  of  doing  it  himself,  would  involve  what  no  good  man 
would  intentionally  impute  to  God. 

To  sum  up  all  in  a  word.  If  God  keeps  believers  by 
his  efficiency,  he  could  have  prevented  sin.  If  he  keeps 
them  by  the  controlling  power  of  motives,  he  could  have 
prevented  sin.     But  if  he  does  not  keep  them  at  all,  but 

"  Letter  to  Dr  Havves. 


188  god's  poweu 

only  foresees  that  they  will  keep  themselves,  under  the  in- 
fluence of  motives  common  to  all ;  then  the  following  facts 
are  wholly  unaccounted  for ;  namely,  that,  as  the  reward 
of  Christ,  God  covenanted  with  him  to  keep  them;  that 
he  covenanted  with  the  Church  to  keep  them;  that  he 
takes  to  himself  the  praise  of  keeping  them  by  his  "power 
— through  faith  unto  salvation  ;"  and  finally,  that  they  all 
without  exception  do  persevere  in  a  world  full  of  tempta- 
tions, and  while  embarrassed  by  their  old  habits  and  re- 
maining sins. 

I  now  turn  more  directly  to  the  great  investigation. 
And  in  the  outset  I  wish  to  dispose  of  a  few  texts  which 
are  thought  by  our  brethren  to  lie  against  us.  "  What 
could  have  been  done  more  to  my  vineyard  that  I  have 
not  done  in  it?"  "The  Lord — is  long-suffering  to  us 
ward,  not  willing  that  any  should  perish  but  that  all  should 
come  to  repentance."  "  Who  will  have  all  men  to  be 
saved  and  to  come  unto  the  knowledge  of  the  truth."* 
If  the  doctrine  of  divine  efficiency  is  true,  these  texts 
ought  to  be  just  what  they  are ;  and  therefore  they  do  not 
lie  against  the  doctrine,  nor  of  course  against  the  power 
of  God  to  prevent  sin.  If  we  are  dependent  on  God  for 
holiness,  and  none  the  less  under  obligations,  then  we 
sustain  two  relations  to  God,  in  a  great  measure  inde- 
pendent of  each  other  ;  namely,  that  of  recipients  of  his 
sanctifying  impressions  and  that  of  moral  agents  ;  in 
other  words,  that  of  beings  acted  upon  and  that  of  beings 
acting.     And  if,  on  the  one  hand,  we  are  none  the  less  de- 

*  Isai.  5.  4.     1  Tira.  2.  4.    2  Pet.  3.  9. 


TO  PREVENT  SIN.  189 

pendent  for  being  bound,  and,  on  the  other,  none  the  less 
under  obligations  for  being  dependent,  then  each  of  these 
relations  is  entire  without  reference  to  the  other.  And 
then  a  being  who  acts  according  to  truth,  must  act  towards 
us  as  moral  agents  without  reference  to  our  dependence, 
and  towards  us  as  dependent  without  reference  to  our  ob- 
ligations ;  that  is,  he  must  speak  to  us  as  moral  agents  as 
though  we  were  independent,  and  must  speak  about  us  as 
dependent  as  though  we  were  clay  in  the  hands  of  the 
potter,  without  powers  or  obligations.  God,  as  he  acts 
towards  the  moral  agent,  is  the  moral  Governour :  as  he 
acts  towards  the  dependent  subject,  is  the  Sovereign  Effi- 
cient Cause.  In  the  character  of  Moral  Governour,  he  has 
no  influence  to  employ  but  motives.  In  the  character  of 
Sovereign  Efficient  Cause,  he  does,  nothing  but  produce 
sanctifying  impressions ;  in  doing  which  he  acts  as  a 
Sovereign,  except  when  he  produces  them  as  a  gracious 
reward  or  in  answer  to  prayer,  or  when  he  withholds  them 
as  a  punishment,  as  in  the  case  of  judicial  blindness.  In 
these  instances  alone  the  two  departments  run  into  each 
other.  In  all  other  cases  they  are  wholly  separate  and 
independent.  The  Moral  Governour  fills  immeasurably  the 
greater  space,  because  God  has  inconceivably  more  to  say 
and  do  to  creatures  as  bound  to  obey,  than  to  creatures  as 
merely  dependent.  And  as,  in  his  direct  treatment  of 
moral  agents,  he  can  express  the  benevolence  of  his  nature, 
the  Moral  Governour,  who  employs  no  influence  biit 
motives,  can  sincerely  express  the  kindness  of  his  heart  in 
measures  and  in  language  which  have  no  reference  to 
men's  dependence,   and   which   any  benevolent  king  or 


190 


GOD  S  POWER 


father  might  employ  who  could  do  nothing  but  make  pro- 
visions for  others  and  wield  motives.  It  is  the  Moral 
Governour  alone  who  says,  "  What  could  have  been  done 
more  to  my  vineyard  that  I  have  not  done  in  it?"  The 
meaning  is,  what  provisions  could  I  have  made,  or  what 
motives  could  I  have  urged,  more  than  I  have  done  ?  But 
the  Sovereign  Efficient  Cause  says,  "  The  king's  heart  is 
in  the  hand  of  the  Lord  as  the  rivers  of  water :  he  turneth 
it  whithersoever  he  will."  The  Moral  Governour  says, 
"  The  Lord — is  long  suffering, — not  willing  that  any 
should  perish  but  that  all  should  come  to  repentance." 
The  Sovereign  Efficient  Cause  says,  "Therefore  hath  he 
mercy  on  whom  he  will  have  mercy,  and  whom  he  will  he 
hardeneth."  Now  upon  the  principle  of  divine  efficiency, 
and  while  men  are  allowed  to  be  none  the  less  bound  on 
that  account,  such,  to  comport  with  truth,  must  be  the 
language  of  God  to  moral  agents,  for  whom  he  can  do 
nothing  but  provide  privileges,  and  over  whom  he  has  no 
control  but  by  motives,  and  by  his  direct  treatment  of 
whom  he  can  express  the  benevolence  of  his  heart.  As 
such  language  comports  with  truth  upon  the  principle  of 
an  efficiency  which  does  not  impair  moral  agency,  it  does 
not  lie  against  us,  but  leaves  the  question  of  efficiency  or 
no  efficiency  to  be  decided  by  other  proofs. 

We  admit  that  whatever  God  does  by  efficiency  or 
permission  is  intended  to  })romote  the  highest  happiness 
of  the  universe,  and  that  this  happiness  will  probably  be 
connected  with  the  highest  holiness  :  and  in  this  sense 
God  is  striving,  perhaps  with  all  his  might,  to  promote,  in 
his  kingdom  at  large,  the  rational  operations  of  h.oliness, 


TO  PREVENT  SIN.  191 

under  the  guidance  of  the  highest  attainable  knowledge. 
He  therefore  is  displaying  himself  as  fast  probably  as  the 
nature  of  things  will  admit.  For  this  highest  exhibition 
of  himself,  which  involves  the  display  of  all  truth,  the 
punishment  of  sin  and  the  work  of  redemption  I  believe 
to  be  necessary.  Whether  he  is  aiming  to  exalt  the 
universe,  as  a  whole  and  in  all  its  ages,  to  the  highest 
possible  holiness,  is  not  for  me  to  say.  It  is  likely  to  be 
so.  But  if  this  is  what  our  brethren  mean,  they  do  not 
draw  just  conclusions  from  their  premise ;  for  it  does  not 
follow  from  God's  aiming  at  the  greatest  general  holiness, 
that  some  instances  of  sin  are  not  necessary  to  the  greatest 
good,  nor  that  he  is  doing  his  utmost  to  make  every  in- 
dividual holy.  It  only  proves  that  he  aims  to  make  every 
individual  holy  so  far  as  comports  with  the  general  in- 
terest of  holiness ;  and  this  no  believer  in  revelation  denies. 
If  when  our  brethren  say,  God  does  the  best  for  each 
that  he  can  consistently  with  the  highest  prevalence  of 
holiness  in  the  universe  in  all  ages,  they  mean  no  more 
than  that  the  greatest  display  of  his  glory  is  necessary 
to  the  highest  general  holiness,  and  that  he  does  for 
each  the  best  he  can  consistently  with  his  glory  ;  I  do 
not  object ;  and  could  say  the  same  in  perfect  consistence 
with  divine  efficiency.  But  if  they  mean,  (as  certainly 
they  do  if  they  mean  any  thing  contrary  to  the  common 
doctrine,)  that  God  does  all  he  can  to  make  each  indivi- 
dual holy  which  comports  with  moral  agency  ;  (the  only 
limit  that  can  be  fixed,  since  holiness  in  every  case  is  bet- 
ter for  the  universe  than  sin  in  its  stead,  and  since  no 
conceivable  harm  could  result  from  his  trying  in  every 


i9'2  god's  power 

case  to  bring  about  that  which,  for  that  particular  case. 
would  be  the  best  for  the  universe;)  then  I  deny.  Could 
not  more  have  been  done  in  our  w'orld  for  six  thousand 
years  consistently  with  moral  agency  ?  Could  not  more 
than  one  Noah  have  been  -sent  to  the  antediluvian  world '? 
Could  not  all  nations  have  had  a  Moses  and  a  Pentateuch  ? 
Could  not  the  God  of  miracles  have  filled  all  lands  with 
Bibles  and  with  Pauls?  Could  not  the  spirit  of  1792  have 
begun  a  tliousand  years  sooner  ?  That  God  has  done  the 
best  he  could  for  the  display  of  the  character  of  man  and 
his  own, — for  the  manifestation  of  his  justice,  mercy,  and 
patience, — for  filling  the  universe  with  the  knowledge  of 
truth,  and  thus  providing  the  means  of  the  highest  general 
holiness  and  happiness ;  I  am  willing  to  believe.  But  that 
he  has  done  all  he  could  consistently  with  moral  agency,  for 
the  conversion  of  each  individual ;  or,  (which  amounts 
to  the  same  thing,)  that  he  has  done  all  he  could  for  the 
conversion  of  each  that  consisted  with  the  highest  holiness 
of  the  universe,  upon  the  assumed  principle  that  holiness 
in  every  case  is  better  for  the  holiness  of  the  universe 
than  sin  in  its  stead ;  that  is  to  say,  all  he  could  for  each ; 
I  cannot  believe.  These  several  suppositions  amount  to 
the  same  thing.  For  if  the  holiness  of  each  individual 
is  better  for  the  holiness  of  the  universe  than  sin  in  its 
stead,  and  if  God  has  done  all  he  could  for  the  conversion 
of  each  individual  that  consisted  with  the  highest  holiness 
of  the  universe,  then  lie  has  done  all  he  could  for  the  con- 
version of  each  that  comported  with  moral  agency  :  in  other 
words,  all  he  could.  What  other  limit  can  be  set  ?  If  the 
holiness  of  each  individual  is  better  for  the  holiness  of  the 


TO  PREVENT  SIN.  193 

universe  than  sin  in  its  stead,  how  could  it  obstruct  the 
holiness  of  the  universe  for  God  to  go  to  the  utmost  feasi- 
ble limit  with  each?  If  he  succeeded,  the  holiness  of  the 
universe  would  be  advanced  and  in  no  way  marred ;  un- 
less it  would  furnish  the  universe  with  more  constraining 
motives  to  holiness  for  some  to  be  sinners  and  punished, 
which  is  contrary  to  the  supposition.  If  he  failed,  it  is 
inconceivable  how  the  effort  could  make  worse  any  but 
the  rejecters  themselves,  who  would  soon  confine  the  injury 
to  hell  and  take  it  from  other  worlds.  At  any  rate  he 
could  not  have  been  kept  back  from  doing  his  utmost  for 
each  by  foreseeing  a  failure :  for  as  both  the  failure  and 
success  must  depend  on  the  self-determining  power,  which 
lies  beyond  his  control,  he  could  not,  so  far  as  we  can 
conceive,  have  foreseen  the  result.  Indeed  it  is  an  over- 
whelming argument  against  this  self-determining  power, 
that  it  would  shut  out  all  the  actions  of  creatures  from  his 
foresight,  and  leave  the  whole  moral  universe  for  the 
future  to  him  a  perfect  blank. 

It  does  not  follow  that  God  could  not  have  prevented 
sin,  from  tlie  fact  that  he  has  not  prevented  it :  for  he  has 
important  purposes  to  answer  by  means  of  sin.  "  The 
Lord  hath  made  all  tilings  for  himself,  yea  even  the  wick- 
ed for  the  day  of  evil."  That  is  to  say,  for  his  own  pur- 
poses he  made  Judas,  with  a  full  knowledge  of  the  traitor's 
course,  and  with  an  eye  distinctly  fixed  on  "  the  day  of 
evil."  Less  than  this,  I  think,  cannot  be  made  of  the  text. 
But  whatever  else  it  implies,  it  certainly  implies  that  God 
has  purposes  to  answer  by  sin.  He  had  purposes  to  an- 
swer by  the  sin  of  Joseph's  brethren,  and  a  providence  in 
17 


194  god's  power 

that  affair.  "God  sent  me  before  you  to  preserve  you  a 
posterity  in  the  earth  and  to  save  your  lives  by  a  great 
deliverance.  So  now  it  was  not  you  that  sent  me  hither 
but  God."  He  had  purposes  to  answer  by  the  sin  of 
Pharaoh  and  a  providence  in  that  affair.  "For  the  Scrip- 
ture saith  unto  Pharaoh,  Even  for  this  same  purpose  have 
I  raised  thee  up,  that  I  might  show  my  power  in  thee,  and 
that  my  name  might  be  declared  throughout  all  the  earth.'' 
He  had  purposes  to  answer  by  the  pride  of  the  Assyrian 
king  and  a  providence  in  that  matter.  "  O  Assyrian, 
the  rod  of  my  anger ; — I  will  send  him  against  a  hypo- 
critical nation. — Howbeit  he  meaneth  not  so,  neither  doth 
his  heart  think  so ;  but  it  is  in  his  heart  to  destroy  and  to 
cut  off  nations  not  a  few. — Wherefore — I  will  punish  the 
fruit  of  the  stout  heart  of  the  king  of  Assyria  and  the  glory 
of  his  high  looks. —  Shall  the  axe  boast  itself  against  him 
that  heweth  therewith?  or  shall  the  saw  magnify  itself 
against  him  that  shaketh  it?"  God  had  purposes  to  answer 
by  the  sins  of  the  betrayer  and  murderers  of  Christ,  and  a 
pre-determined  providence  in  those  matters.  "  Truly  the 
Son  of  man  goeth  as  it  was  determined,  but  wo  unto  that 
man  by  whom  he  is  betrayed."  "  Herod  and  Pontius 
Pilate,  with  the  Gentiles  and  the  people  of  Israel,  were 
gathered  together  for  to  do  whatsoever  thy  hand  and 
thy  counsel  determined  before  to  be  done."  "  Him  being 
delivered  by  the  determinate  counsel  and  foreknowledge 
of  God,  .ye  have  taken  and  by  wicked  hands  have  cruci- 
fied and  slain."  After  God  had  created  the  universe  "  by" 
Christ  and  "for''  Christ,  that  is,  for  a  theatre  on  which 
he  might  accomplish  the  wonders  of  redemption  and  un- 


TO  PREVENT  SIN.  195 

cover  the  great  designs  of  God ;  after  all  his  covenants 
with  him  and  the  Church ;  after  all  the  preparations  for 
his  advent  and  death  in  the  types  and  predictions  and 
arrangements  of  the  old  dispensation ;  after  sending  him  to 
die  and  commanding  him  to  die  ;  can  it  be  supposed  that 
he  did  all  he  could  consistently  with  moral  agency  to 
prevent  the  sin  of  Judas  and  of  the  Jews  ?*  If  your  mean- 
ing is,  that  he  did  all  he  could  consistently  with  the 
highest  display  of  his  glory,  and  therefore  with  the  great- 
est ultimate  holiness  and  happiness  of  the  universe,  this 
is  true,  and  leaves  untouched  his  power  to  prevent  sin. 

Sin  has  certainly  been  the  occasion  of  immeasurable 
good.  Had  there  been  no  sin  the  universe  would  have 
lost  all  the  glorious  results  of  redemption,  which,  as  we 
have  seen,  was  the  great  end  for  which  God  built  the 
universe.  Christ  was  the  "  Word"  by  which  the  whole 
mind  of  God  was  to  be  expressed  :  Christ  is  the  "  face" 
from  which  all  "  the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  the  glory 
of  God"  shines:  and  "God— created  all  things  by  Jesus 
Christ,  to  the  intent  that  now  unto  the  principalities  and 
powers  in  heavenly  places  might  be  known  by  the  Church 
the  manifold  wisdom  of  God,  according  to  the  eternal  pur- 
pose which  he  purposed  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord,"  "  No 
man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time ;  the  only  begotten  Son 
which  is  in  the  bosom  of  the  Father,  he  hath  declared 
him."t     Without  sin  and  the  work  of  redemption,  all  the 

*  Gen.  45.  7,  8.  Prov.  16.  4.  Isai.  10.  5—19.  Luke  22.  22.  John 
10.  18.  Acts  2.  23  and  4.  27,  28.  Rom.  9.  17.  -Col.  1.  16.  with 
John  1.  3. 

t  John  1.1,18,    2Cor.  4.  6.    Eph.  3.  9—11.    ' 


196  god's  power 

displays  of  God  which  belong  to  the  present  universe 
would  have  been  lost ;  and  what  could  have  come  in  their 
stead  no  message  from  heaven  has  told  us.  The  punish- 
ment of  sin  will  reveal  God  and  the  claims  of  his  govern- 
ment as  nothing  else  probably  could  have  done.  "  Tor- 
mented with  fire  and  brimstone  in  the  presence  of  the  holy 
angels  and  in  the  presence  of  the  Lamb ;  and  the  smoke 
of  their  torment"  ascending  "up  forever  and  ever"  !  This 
will  lay  down  into  the  heart  of  the  universe  the  boundless 
evil  of  sin  and  the  infinite  claims  of  God,  as  nothing  else 
could  do.  If  "  there  is  joy  in  the  presence  of  the  angels 
of  God  over  one  sinner  that  repenteth,"  "more  than  over 
ninety  and  nine"  who  never  fell,  then,  on  the  strong 
principle  of  contrast,  there  may  be  more  joy  in  the  universe 
than  though  sin  and  redemption  had  never  been. 

If  God  has  no  power  to  sanctify  nor  effectually  to  re- 
strain sin,  prayer  for  the  suppression  of  sin  and  the  con- 
version of  the  world  would  seem  to  be  mockery.  Or  if  in 
such  petitions  a  limited  power  is  to  be  acknowledged,  it 
would  be  no  more  than  the  expression  of  the  truth  to  add, 
as  far  as  thou  art  able.  But  an  appendix  so  unlike  the 
Scriptures  and  so  shocking  to  mankind,  would  soon  open 
the  eyes  of  all  to  the  claims  of  the  new  doctrine. 

Upon  the  principle  of  our  brethren,  judicial  blindness 
results  from  the  withdravvment  of  the  illuminating  Spirit 
and  of  such  restraints  as  God  in  his  providence  can  im- 
pose. But  even  this  is  abandoning  men  to  sin  which 
might  have  been  in  a  measure  restrained.  God  therefore 
does  not  do  his  utmost  to  restrain  sin.  You  say,  he  aban- 
dons some  as  a  warning  to  others,  and   by  this  means 


TO  PREVENT  SIN.  197 

promotes  holiness  in  his  kingdom  at  large.  Then  the 
withdrawment  of  the  Spirit  and  the  relaxation  of  restraint, 
which  lead  to  increased  sin,  are,  in  some  instances,  better 
for  the  holiness  of  the  universe  than  more  light  and  restraint 
and  less  sin  in  their  stead.  And  why,  upon  the  same  princi- 
ple, may  not  sin  and  its  punishment  be  better  in  some 
cases  for  the  holiness  of  the  universe  than  perfect  obedi- 
ence in  its  stead  ?  It  is  impossible  to  reconcile  a  single 
instance  of  abandonment  in  any  world  with  the  highest 
efforts  of  God  in  every  case  to  restrain  sin.  But  he  does 
abandon  sinners  on  earth  and  in  hell.  And  if  he  can 
promote  the  public  good  by  letting  sin  loose  to  rage  when 
he  could  have  restrained  it,  why  may  he  not  benefit  the 
the  universe  by  suffering  sin  to  come  into  existence  when 
he  could  have  prevented  it?  I  admit  that  judicial  blind- 
ness results  from  nothing  on  God's  part  but  the  withhold- 
ing of  influence  and  restraint  when  he  might  have  applied 
them ;  but  his  manner  of  speaking  of  this  seems  to  imply 
more  absolute  dominion  over  mind  than  our  brethren  are 
willing  to  allow.  "  God  gave  them  over  to  a  reprobate  mind." 
"  Hath  not  the  potter  power  over  the  clay,  of  the  same 
lump  to  make  one  vessel  unto  honour  and  another  unto 
dishonour  ?"  "  For  this  cause  God  shall  send  them  strong 
delusion  that  they  should  believe  a  lie,  that  they  all  might 
be  damned."  "  A  stone  of  stumbling  and  a  rock  of  of- 
fence to  them  which  stumble  at  the  word,  being  disobe- 
dient, whereunto  also  they  were  ajjjjointed."*  I  admit  that 
God's  appointing  them  to  disobedience  was  only  decree- 

»  Rom.  1.  28.  and  9.  21.    2  Thes.  2.  11,  12.     1  Pet.  2.  8. 
17* 


198  god's  power 

ing  not  to  do  all  he  could  to  sanctify  them.  But  if  all  that 
God  could  do  was  to  invite  them  by  his  Spirit,  and  the 
issue  depended  on  their  self-determining  power ;  and  if 
for  a  time  he  did  invite  them  and  did  all  he  could  for  their 
salvation  ;  it  would  be  strong  language  to  call  the  with- 
drawment  of  a  rejected  invitation  to  obedience  an  appoint- 
ment to  disobedience.  How  could  he  appoint  to  disobe- 
dience if  he  had  no  power  to  prevent  it  ?  The  language 
becomes  still  stronger.  "  Therefore  hath  he  mercy  on 
whom  he  will  have  mercy,  and  whom  he  will  he  harden- 
eth."  "  The  election  hath  obtained  it  and  the  rest  were 
blinded ;  according  as  it  is  written,  God  hath  given  them 
the  spirit  of  slumber ;  eyes  that  they  should  not  see  and 
ears  that  they  should  not  hear."  "  Therefore  they  could 
not  believe,  because  that  Esaias  said  again.  He  hath 
blinded  their  eyes  and  hardened  their  heart,  that  they  should 
not  see  with  their  eyes  nor  understand  with  their  heart." 
"  Why  hast  thou  made  us  to  err  from  thy  ways  and  hard- 
ened our  heart  from  thy  fear  ?"  God  is  said  to  have  hard- 
ened the  heartof  Pharaoh,  of  the  Egyptians,  of  Sihon,  and 
of  the  Canaanites.* 

All  these  texts,  I  suppose,  prove  no  more,  as  to  the 
wicked,  than  that  God  withdrew  his  influence  and  re- 
straint :  but  I  think  they  imply  a  power  to  prevent  sin. 
At  least  they  show  the  permission  of  sin  in  the  excess 
when  that  excess  might  have  been  prevented.  And  they 
seem  worded  with  too  much  authority  for  one  who  can 

•Exod.  7.  3,  13.  and  14.  17.  Deut.  2.30.  Josh.  11.  20.  Isai.  C3. 
17.    John  12.  40.     Rom.  9.  18.  and  11.  7,  8. 


TO  PREVENT  SIN.  199 

only  invite  but  cannot  control.  Can  it  be  seriously 
thought  after  all  these  representations,  tliat  God  had 
nothing  more  to  do  in  those  cases  than  to  send  his 
word  and  illuminating  Spirit  and  restraining  providence 
to  do  his  best  to  keep  them  from  sin  and  to  make  them 
holy,  and  afterwards,  in  discouragement,  to  withdraw  his 
restraint  and  inviting  Spirit  ?  You  might  as  well  say  of  a 
faithful  minister,  who  had  followed  his  hearers  with  un- 
remitting entreaties  and  tears,  that  he  had  sovereignly 
hardened  the  obstinate,  because  he  had  withdrawn,  dis- 
couraged, to  another  people  ;  especially  if  he  was  the  only 
minister  on  earth. 

It  is  the  common  doctrine  of  the  Bible  that  God  can 
restrain  from  particular  sins.  God  said  to  Abimelech, 
I  also  withheld  thee  from  sinning  against  me ;  therefore 
suffered  I  thee  not  to  touch  her."  "  This  day,"  said 
Phinehas,  "  we  perceive  that  the  Lord  is  among  us,  because 
ye  have  not  committed  this  traspass  against  the  Lord." 
Nay  more,  in  language  which  cannot  be  misunderstood 
or  explained  away,  we  are  assured  that  God  can  unlimit- 
edly  restrain  sin,  and  that  he  will  restrain  all  that  does  not 
contribute  to  his  glory ;  in  other  words,  that  every  sin 
which  he  allows  to  exist  will  promote  his  praise.  "  Surely 
the  wrath  of  man  shall  praise  thee;  the  remainder  of 
wrath  shalt  thou  restrain."*  Were  there  no  other  text  in 
the  Bible  on  the  subject,  this  ought  forever  to  settle  the 
question  :  and  I  cannot  but  wonder  that,  with  this  single 

"0011.20.6.    Josh.  22.  31.    Ps.  76.  10. 


200  god's  power 

text  on  tlie  sacred  page,  there  should  be,  among  believers 
in  divine  revelation,  a  remaining  doubt  on  earth. 

In  all  the  common  affairs  of  life  God  is  certainly  able 
to  turn  the  hearts  of  men  as  he  pleases.  Many  texts  in 
proof  of  this  were  cited  in  the  fourth  chapter.  I  add  ano- 
ther thought.  Christ  has  received  from  the  Father  power 
to  conquer  sin  and  all  its  pernicious  effects.  "  Who  shall 
change  our  vile  body  that  it  may  be  fashioned  like  unto 
his  glorious  body,  according  to  tlie  working  whereby  he  is 
able  even  to  subdue  all  things  unto  himself"*  When  the 
apostle  uttered  this  he  had  his  eye  directly  on  the  effects 
of  sin  as  exhibited  at  the  bottom  of  the  grave,  and  affirm- 
ed that  the  mighty  Conqueror  would  subdue  death  and  all 
things  else.  And  shall  sin  itself,  the  greatest  enemy  and 
cause  of  all,  elude  his  power  ?  These  two  things,  his 
power  to  control  the  heart  in  common  matters  and  his 
power  to  subdue  sin,  place  him  on  an  undivided  throne. 
Such  a  throne,  to  the  joy  of  the  holy  universe,  he  does 
fill.  "  My  counsel  shall  stand  and  I  will  do  all  my  plea- 
sure." "  Whatsoever  the  Lord  pleased,  that  did  he  in 
heaven  and  in  earth,  in  the  seas  and  all  deep  places." 
"  The  counsel  of  the  Lord  standeth  forever  ;  the  thoughts 
of  his  heart  to  all  generations."  "  He  is  of  one  mind  and 
who  can  turn  him  ?  and  what  his  soul  desireth  even  that 
he  doth."  "All  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  are  reputed 
as  nothing,  and  he  doth  according  to  his  will  in  the  army 
of  heaven  and  among  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  :    and 

*  Phil.  3.21. 


TO  PREVENT  SIN.  201 

none  can  stay  his  hand  or  say  unto  him,  What  dost 
thou  ?"*  This  looks  like  any  thing  but  weakness  and 
disappointment  and  frustrated  desires ;  any  thing  but  ina- 
bility to  regulate  the  moral  universe  as  he  pleases  ;  any 
thing  but  being  defeated  in  his  attempts  to  restrain  his 
creatures  from  sin  or  to  bring  them  back  to  obedience. 
Such  a  theory  assigns  to  him  a  very  limited  empire  :  and 
certainly  it  takes  from  the  universe  its  highest  consolation. 
If  the  question  could  be  put  to  every  holy  being  in  hea- 
ven and  earth,  Shall  all  the  counsels  of  infinite  Avisdom 
and  love  stand  ?  shall  all  the  wishes  of  infinite  benevolence 
be  gratified  ?  one  universal  shout,  "  as  the  voice  of  many 
waters,"  would  respond,  "  Amen  : — alleluia ;  for  the  Lord 
God  omnipotent  reigneth." 

*  Job  23.  13.     Ps.  33.  11,  and  115.  3.  and  135.  C,     Isai.  46,  10. 
Dan.  4.  35. 


CHAPTER    X 

Alleged  Dominion  of  Motives. Jl  Distinct  Theory. 

I  HAVE  now  finished  what  I  had  to  say  on  the  subject 
of  divine  efficiency,  and  have  come  to  anotlier  theory  en- 
tirely distinct,  but  equally  opposed  to  that  fundamental 
truth.  It  is,  that  God  can  mould  the  heart  at  pleasure 
by  the  mere  influence  of  motives,  whether  they  are  adapt- 
ed to  its  present  temper  or  not.  This,  so  far  as  I  know, 
is  a  theory  entirely  new :  but  it  accords  much  better  than 
the  other  with  the  true  doctrines.  It  is  reconcileable 
with  special  grace  in  regeneration  and  with  election  and 
perseverance.  Still  it  is  nothing  but  moral  suasion,  and 
ill  comports  with  that  representation  of  divine  power  in 
regeneration  with  which  the  Scriptures  abound.  And  all 
that  has  been  said  in  proof  of  divine  efficiency  lies  against 
it.  All  that  has  been  said  to  show  that  the  Bible  does 
not  ascribe  regenerating  power  to  the  word,  lies  more 
against  this  than  against  the  other  theory  ;  for  if  the  mere 
illuminating  Spirit  cannot  give  efficacy  to  the  word  at  all, 
surely  it  cannot  always. 

On  some  printed  pages  before  me  I  find  the  following. 
''  It  is  evident,  if  God  is  able  to  exert  his  agency  on  the 
mind  through  the  truth,  that  no  limitation  can  be  assigned 
to  that  agency  short  of  absolute  omnipotence. — Through 


204  ALLEGED  DOMINION 

its  instrumentality  God  can  exert  any  influence  however 
great,  and  overcome  every  obstacle  to  be  found  in  the  un- 
renewed soul."     "  I  have  no  where  said  that  regeneration 
is  caused  by  the  will  of  man,  but  by  the  Spirit  of  the  living 
God    operating  through   motives."      "  The   creature   is 
turned — in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye."      "  You  do  not — 
make  motives  the  cause  of  all  the  holy  and  sinful  acts  of 
the  mind,  but  you  suppose  that  the  cause  of  these  actions 
is  to  be  found  in  the  mind  itself"     "  The  will  is  deter- 
mined to  choose  the  Almighty  through  the  influence  of 
motives  as  crowded  upon  the  mind  by  the  eternal  Spirit." 
"  How  will  this  serve  to  throw  him  off"  from  his  Antinomi- 
anism,  as  long  as  you  tell  him  that  he  has  a  depraved 
heart  or  temper  that  renders  him  entirely  unsusceptible  of 
the  influence  of  holy  motives  ?"    On  the  pages  of  another 
work  I  find  the  following.     "God  regenerates  men  with 
truth  as  a  Sovereign,  when  and  where  he  pleases."     "  The 
sentiment  of  the  text  may — be  thus  expressed  :  Ye  are 
regenerated  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  truths  or 
motives  or  moral  suasion  of  Scripture."  "  These  truths  are 
motives.    They  constitute  the  moral  suasion  of  the  Bible." 
"  Truth  or  motive  are  God's  established  laws  of  governing 
the  moral  world,  just  as  attraction  and  gravitation  are  God's 
established  laws   of  governing  many  movements  in  the 
natural  world."     "  God  has  ordained  that  our  acts  and 
volitions — shall  be  caused  by  motives."     "  All  our  volitions 
and  actions  are  caused  hj  motives." 

These  two  writers  fully  deny  the  self-determining  pow- 
er. But  they  both  represent  the  action  of  God  to  be  on 
the  truth,  and  not  directly  on  the  mind.     One  of  them, 


OF  MOTIVES.  205 

finding  fault,-  says,  "  You  had  recourse  to  the  doctrine  that 
in  all  the  acts  and  exercises  of  the  moral  agent,  the  Spirit 
acts  directly  on  the  mind  and  mind  only."  "  Unless  an 
instiument  break  it  will  bear  power  applied  to  it  to  any 
extent.  Hence  if  God  can  exert  an  influence  through  the 
truth  on  the  mind  of  the  sinner,  inasmuch  as  the  truth  is 
an  instrument,  that— cannot  break,  ^o  through  its  instru- 
mentality God  can  exert  any  influence  however  great." 
"  I  know  _  that  you  assert  that  God  is  unable  to  exert  any 
influence  on  or  through  the  truth ;  but — does  the  sujDposi- 
tion — diminish-his  claim  to  the — gratitude  of  his  creatures? 
— Is  the  warriour  who  destroys  the  enemies  of  his  country 
with  swords  and  muskets  and  cannon,  any  the  less  enti- 
tled to  some  distinguished  meed,  than  if  he  had  destroyed 
them  with  his  hands?"  Mark  this.  "His  hands  touch  not 
the  enemy,  but  onl,y  touch  tlie  instruments.  The  other 
writer  says,  "We  do  not  deny  the  necessity  of  the  Spirit's 
special  influences  when  we  say  men  are  begotten  of  the 
truth.  You  do  not  deny  the  special  agency  of  the  mecha- 
nic when  you  affirm  that  your  table  was  made  with  a  plane 
and  chissel  and  hammer."  "  A  friend  comes  to  your  door, 
and,  finding  an  immense  log  cut — off", — inquires  how  it  was 
divided.  You  answer,-with  this  axe.  That,  he  says,  is — 
untrue  :  for,  in  the  first  place,  you  cut  off  the  log,  and  not 
the  axe ;  in  the  second  place,  that  axe  has  no  power  in  it- 
self whatever ;  and  in  the  third  place,  you  yourself  could 
not  have  made  such  a  feeble  instrument  accomplish  so 
great  an  undertaking." 

Now  all  these  representations  go  upon  the  principle  that 
the  Spirit  never  touches  the  mind,  but  only  touches  the 

18 


•20G  ALLEGED  DOMINION 

truth,  and  truth  touches  the  mind ;  and  that  tlie  mind,  in 
view  of  truth  made  clear  by  the  illuminating  Spirit,  turns 
without  any  other  action  of  God.  And  this  is  old  Armi- 
uianism,  with  the  single  addition  that  God  can  make  the 
truth  so  clear  as  to  ensure  its  success.  Does  this  take 
away  the  self-determining  power  1  The  only  self-deter- 
mination held  by  Whitby  was  in  regard  to  attending  to  the 
thing  presented  and  believing  it  to  be  the  greatest  good. 
As  these  writers,  ascribe  no  such  independent  power  to  the 
mind,  but  believe  it  absolutely  controlled  by  truth  divinely 
illummed,  they  must  be  acquitted  from  holding  to  the  self- 
determining  power. 

This  idea  of  God's  pressing  upon  truth  and  pressing  it 
into  the  mind,  and  by  the  pressure,  not  only  introducing 
it,  but  shaping  the  affections,  seems  to  me  one  of  the  most 
extravagant  dreams  ever  cpnceived.  The  real  meaning 
however  is,  that  God,  by  a  pressure  upon  truth,  thrusts  it 
into  the  ei/e  of  the  mind,  and  thus  makes  it  take  such 
hold  of  the  natural  susceptibility  to  motives,  as  to  cause  the 
affections  which  he  wishes  to  excite. 

Allowing  that  the  mind,  in  all  its  holy  affections,  is 
consciously  moved  by  the  rational  considerations  involved  in 
truth,  (a  point  about  which  no  one. can  doubt,)  it  does  not 
follow  that  the  action  of  God  which  precedes  these  affec- 
tions is  on  the  truth  and  not  on  the  mind.  How  can  God 
act  upon  truth  ?  If  this  were  done  some  change  must  be 
wrought  in  truth,  in  point  of  form  or  place  or  j>osition  or 
motion,  or  in  some  other  respect :  but  what  change  in  form 
or  position  or  place  or  motion,  or  in  any  other  respect,  can 
be  wrought  in  truth  .'     God  makes  the  truth  seen  and  fell 


OF  MOTIVES.  207 

and  loved  :  can  you  prove  that  this  is  not  done  by  an  ope- 
ration on  the  mind?  Can  it  not  be  infallibly  proved  that  it 
is  done  by  an  operation  on  the  mind,  and  cannot  be  done 
by  acting  on  any  thing  else?  All  the  change  that  can  be 
predicated  of  truth  in  this  case,  respects  it,  not  as  an  active 
instrument,  but  as  a  passive  object.  It  is  seen,  felt,  and 
loved  by  an  active  mind  which  did  not  see,  feel,  and  love 
it  before.  Is  not  this  all  the  change  that  can  be  predicated 
of  truth  ?  Can  you  prove  any  more  1  Can  you  conceive 
any  more  ?  Does  the  Bible  say  any  where  that  the  action 
is  not  on  the  mind  to  cause  it  to  see,  feel,  and  love  the 
tnith?  In  reference  to  the  conscious  piercings  of  truth 
when  reflected  on  and  felt,  we  hear  indeed  of  "  the  sword 
of  the  Spirit;"  but  that  is  a  figure  of  speech  from  which 
nothing  so  particular  and  exact  can  be  inferred.  Does  not 
the  Bible  every  where  speak  of  the  action  as  being  on  the 
mind  ?  And  in  which  has  the  change  actually  taken  place  1 
The  truth  remains  the  same  and  the  mind  is  changed. 
What  it  did  not  see  it  sees ;  what  it  never  felt  before  it 
feels  ;  what  it  hated,  "  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye"  it  loves. 
One  is  the  active  agent  whose  action  is  changed,  the  other 
is  the  passive  object  which  can  only  receive  the  regards  of 
the  mind,  and  remains  forever  the  same.  You  can  see 
with  your  eye  that  the  change  is  not  in  truth  but  in  the 
mind;  and  therefore  that  the  power  has  not  been  applied 
to  truth  but  to  the  mind.  Truth  is  indeed  the  instrument 
of  the  new  affections ;  but  it  is  so  made,  not  by  any  action 
in  truth,  but  by  a  new  action  of  the  mind ;  not  by  any  im- 
pression on  truth,  but  by  an  immediate  impression  on  the 
mind.   This  seems  so  self-evident,  that  the  contrary  opinion 


208  ALLEGED  DOMINION 

appears  to  rae  one  of  the  most  curious  instances  of  turning 
the  emblem  of  a  figure  into  literal  reality,  and  even  of 
transferring  to  truth,  to  thought,  the  attributes  of  matter, 
and  to  a  passive  object  the  energies  of  a  conquering  agent, 
that  I  recollect  to-have  found  in  the  history  of  mind.  Why, 
all  these  piercings  of  "  the  sword  of  the  Spirit"  of  which 
you  speak,  are  nothing  but  the  actings  of  mind  in  view  of 
truth.  Let  God,  by  his  energies  upon  the  soul,  put  mind 
into  action  in  view  of  truth,  and  all  is  done. 

One  of  these  writers,  without  intending  it,  falls  into 
a  happy  manner  of  illustrating  the  very  truth  I  am  sup- 
porting. "To  declare  God  cannot — regenerate  men  v.ith 
truth,  is  to  deny  his  omnipotence.  For  aught  we  know,  God 
could  have  made  the  blowing  of  the  rams'  horns,  not  only 
shake  down  the  walls  of  Jericho,  but  also  convert  all  its 
inhabitants. — He  opened  the  blind  man's  eyes  \\ith  spittle  : 
and  if  he  pleases  he  can  regenerate  us  with  truth."  And 
pray,  did  he  apply  his  po^ver  to  the  rams'  horns  or  to  the 
walls?  to  the  spittle  or  to  the  eyes?  And  had  he  made 
those  trumpets  the  antecedents  to  the  conversion  of  the  in- 
habitants, would  the  power  have  been  applied  to  the  trum- 
pets or  to  their  hearts  ? 

But  there  is  another  question.  If  the  action  of  the 
Spirit  is  immediately  upon  the  mind,  is  it  upon  the  head 
or  the  heart?  Upon  the  head  perhaps  in  convict'on  ;  upon 
the  heart  surely  in  conversion.  The  mind  will  never 
choose  God  and  his  ways  until  religion  appears  to  it  the 
greatest  good.  And  can  religion  be  the  greatest  apparent 
good  to  a  mind  of  bad  affections  ?  If  not,  a  power  must  be 
exerted  behind  the  affections,  prior,  in  the  order  of  nature 


OF  MOTIVES.  209 

to  religion's  appearing  the  greatest  good  ;  prior  therefore 
to  the  mind's  being  swayed  by  motives  to  love  and  choose 
religion. 

Let  us  examine  this  subject.  I  have  no  occasion  to 
explore  the  Scriptures  or  to  dive  into  metaphysical  reason- 
ings :  I  make  my  appeal  directly  to  the  common  experi- 
ence of  mankind.  Tell  the  duellist  of  the  value  of  life,  of 
the  claims  of  humanity,  of  the  claims  of  God  ;  and  what 
does  it  avail  ?  While  those  fiendish  passions  rage  in  his 
heart,  the  greatest  apparent  good  to  him  is  honour  and 
revenge.  Tell  a  drunkard  of  the  ruin  of  his  property, 
the  decay  of  his  constitution,  the  griefs  of  his  family;  you 
can  fasten  no  motives  upon  him ;  because,  with  his  pro- 
pensities, the  greatest  apparent  good  is  the  gratification 
of  his  appetite.  Tell  the  miser  of  the  wants  of  the  dying 
heathen,  the  sacrifices  of  Calvary,  thexommands  of  God  ; 
and  you  cannot  extort  from  his  withered  hand  a  cent  ; 
because,  with  his  sordid  attachments,  the  greatest  appa- 
rent good  is  wrapped  up  in  mammon.  Nothing  can  ap- 
pear the  greatest  good  that  is  opposed  to  the  prevailing 
appetites  and  passions.  If  light  cast  upon  tlie  under- 
standing was  sure  to  control  the  heart,  it  ought  to  appear 
that  every  inan  does  as  well  as  he  knows  how:  that 
wherever  the  knowledge  of  divine  truth  is  found,  there 
reigns  the  love  of  God ;  that  as  no  where  below  the  heavens 
is  knowledge  so  perfect  as  in  hell,  no  where  below  the 
heavens  does  holiness  so  much  abound.  Truth  and  rea- 
son will  ne\  er  gover-n  a  wicked  heart ;  will  never  there- 
fore, under  all  the  lights  of  the  illuminating  Spirit,  and 
even  of  the  last  judgment,  (for  they  are  nothing  but  truth 
IS* 


210  ALLEGED  DOMINION 

and  reason  still,)  transform  it  into  the  image  of  God. 
Then  certainly  they  will  not  do  it  always.  To  say  that 
this  is  breaking  up  all  moral  agency  by  denying  a  "sus- 
ceptibility to  motives  in  the  wicked,  is  arraying  your  power 
to  comprehend  the  secrets  of  nature,  against  all  the  facts 
in  the  universe.  It  is  an  eternal  fact  that  the  damned  will 
not  be  holy,  because  their  bad  affections  will  never  yield 
to  truth  :  tlien,  according  to  your  assumption,-  there  is  no 
moral  agency  or  sin  in  hell. 

The  sole  question  respects  the  power  of  truth  ;  for  the 
self-determining  decision  about  attending  to  it  and  be- 
lieving it  is  disclaimed.  And  if  truth,  more  faintly  and 
unsteadily  seen,  cannot  exhibit  to  the  mind  the  greatest 
apparent  good  in  opposition  to  prevailing  passions,  can  it 
when  more  plainly  and  constantly  seen  ?  Then  the  reason 
why  Judas  does  not  now  love  as  well  as  Peter,  is  that 
God  does  not  present  truth  so  plainly  and  steadily  to  his 
mind.  There  is  no  depravity  to  prevent  the  success  of 
truth  ;  or  if  there  is,  it  operates  only  to  turn  away  the  at- 
tention, an  evil  which  a  clearer  view  of  truth  would  cor- 
rect. A  distinct  view  of  truth,  according  to  this,  would 
make  religion  appear  to  Judas  the  greatest  good,  though 
diametrically  opposed  to  his  satanic  temper.  If  you  say, 
there  is  no  chance  for  religion  to  appear  to  him  the  great- 
est good,  because,  in  his  state  of  unchangeable  reproba- 
tion, it  offers  nothing  which  to  self-love  can  appear  a  good  ; 
I  ask,  is  he  not  under  obligations  to  love  God  and  his 
service  ?  and  yoii  say,  there  can  be  no  moral  agency,  and 
therefore  ho  obligations,  without  a  present  susceptibility  to 
motives  founded  in  self-love.     If  Judas  is  still  under  obli- 


OF  MOTIVES,  211 

gations,  he  is  infinitely  to  blame  that  God  and  his  service 
do  not  appear  to  hiin  the  greatest  good  ;  and  therefore  he 
has  all  the  susceptibility  to  those  motives  which  is  neces- 
sary to  a  moral  agent. 

Self-love  is  essential  to  a  rational  being  :  for  if  I  regard 
my  own  happiness  as  worthless^  I  shall  see  nothing  valua- 
ble in  the  happiness  of  others.  And  if  all  happiness  is 
worthless,  there  is  nothing  for  reason  to  seek  or  approve. 
Nothing  is  reasonable  or  unreasonable.  It  is  then  essen- 
tial to  our  nature  to  be  influenced,  in  personal  matters,  by 
that  which  promises  to  us  the  highest  happiness.  But  we 
have  social,  and  still  more  extended  affections,  which 
reach  after  the  happiness  of  their  objects  irrespective  of 
our  own.  Whatever  tends  to  gratify  these  personal  or 
disinterested  affections,  will  appear  to  us  a  good ;  and  that 
will  appear  the  greatest  good  which  is  calculated  to  gratify 
the  feeling  which  for  the  time  is  the  strongest.  Whatever 
then  falls  in  with  the  predominant  affection,  will  offer  the 
strongest  and  the  prevailing  motive.  This  is  only  saying, 
what  none  can  doubt,  that  all  beings,  good  and  bad,  will 
follow  their  prevailing  inclination.  What  motives  then 
shall  prevail,  must  depend  on  the  state  of  the  affections. 
Of  course,  if  a  motive  which  ought  to  be  the  strongest, 
will,  when  clearly  exhibited  to  the  mind,  certainly  prevail, 
there  is  no  depravity  in  the  universe.  If  the  mind  is 
prepared  to  relish  and  fall  in  with  the  truth  when  clearly 
seen  in  its  own  proper  character,  there  was  no  aversion  to 
it  to  obstruct  belief,  and,  considering  its  infinite  supe- 
riority to  the  w^orld,  nothing  that  could  steadily  draw  away 
the  attention  Irom  it  to  the  world.     Nb  antecedent  depra- 


21*2  ALLEGED  DOMINION 

vity  therefore  kept  out  a  clear  exhibition  of  truth  to  the 
mind,  or  rendered  the  convicting  Spirit  necessary.  If 
that  illuminating  influence  was  necessary  to  penetrate  the 
vail  of  criminal  unbelief,  produced  by  selfish  aversion, 
that  aversion  and  unbelief  must  also  be  overcome,  before 
the  mind  will  relish  the  truth  even  when  it  is  fully  present- 
ed. But  if  there  is  no  such  aversion  or  unbelief  to  over- 
come, but  a  readiness  to  fall  in  with  truth  as  soon  as  it  is 
clearly  seen,  theire  is  no  depravity  at  all.  It  must  always 
depend  on  the  temper  or  affections  whether  truth  shall 
prevail  or  not.  It  is  a  wrong  state  of  the  heart  which 
makes  a  bad  motive  the  strongest.  Cure  that  temper  and 
the  motive  becomes  the  weakest.  Something  must  first 
be  done  upon  the  heart  to  make  the  truth  the  stronger 
motive,  urge  it  whoever  will  and  with  whatever  power 
of  eloquence.     This  is  a  point  wholly  overlooked. 

God  and  self  are  the  only  rivals  for  supreme  affection. 
One  man  loves  God  supremely,  another  love  himself  best 
and  God  not  at  all.  No  motives  can  influence  the  latter  but 
those  which  are  adapted  to  his  self-love  or  social  affections. 
Do  you  say,  they  could  be  addressed  to  his  reason  ?  But 
his  reason  is  exclusively  employed  in  weighing  the  motives 
by  the  interests  to  which  they  refer.  To  his  conscience  ? 
But  what  appeals  to  conscience  can  do  against  reigning 
selfishness,  may  be  learnt  from  the  history  of  the  damn- 
ed. Now  would  stronger  motives  addressed  to  self-love, 
persuade  him  to  love  God?  How  could  such  motives  more 
strongly  persuade  him  to  love  God  than  to  love  himself? 
to  love  God  better  than  himself?  This  brings  out  the 
inconsistency  of  the  whole  scheme.     The  grand  fault  is. 


91*? 
OF  MOTIVES  '*^'^ 


the  sinner  loves  himself  supremely  ;  and  when  he  cannot 
o-et  honour,  wealth,  or  pleasure,  his  dearest  interest  lies  m 
gratifying  the  malignant  passions   which  disappomtment 

has  excited. 

This  is  not  a  mere  prejudice  to  be  corrected  by  light. 
It   is    the    necessary    effect   of    selfishness,    and    would 
be  the  same  in  all  the  light  of  hell,  in  all  the  light  ot 
the  last  judgment,  in  all  the  light   which   heaven   itself 
could  pour  upon  mere  intellect.     Against  that  selfishness 
God  arrays  himself  in  his  commands  and  prohibitions,  and 
loads  it  with  the  penalty  of  eternal  death.     This  rouses 
the  war.     This  perpetuates  hostility  of  the  deadliest  type. 
All  this  time  the  sinner  knows  that  if  he  would  love,  God 
would  make  him  happy.     That  motive  addressed  to  selt- 
interest  against  his  reigning  passions,  has  no  effect.     He 
does  not  love,  but  loves  himself  supremely,  and  hates  God 
as  the  infinite  enemy  and  punisher  of  selfishness,  and  hates 
him  the  more  the  more   he  is  seen.     The  enmity  is  not  a 
delusion  to  be  curedl^y  light.     It  is  not  a  false   image  oi 
God  that  is  hated.      If  it  was,  the  enmity  would  be  a 
hallowed  aversion  to  an   idol.     It  is  enmity  to  the  true 
God      It  is   enmity  to   his  whole   character  and   govern- 
ment     It  is  enmity  which  light,  instead  of  curing,  will 
only  acraravate.     It  must  be  so  if  it  is  the  true  God  that  is 
hated  tnd  if  he  is  hated  in  all  his  character.     The  more 
a  thing  is  seen  that  is  hated  as  a  whole,  the  more  it  will 
be  abhorred.     Light  is  of  vital  importance   to  lead   forth 
good  affections  which  already  have  a  cause,  but  it  cannot 
cure  enmity  so  radical  as  that  of  the  carnal  heart.     What 
new  unfolding  of  the  divine  character  or  of  the   smner's 


214  ALLEGED  DO.MIXION 

interests  can  make  a  selfish  enemy  love  God  better  than 
himself?  Such  an  affection  is  not  to  be  bought  by  any 
bribe  offered  to  self-love.  Self-love  in  the  natural  heart 
is  selfishness,  and  is  the  source  of  all  the  enmity.  It  will 
never  give  its  suffrage  in  favour  of  God,  and  no  bribe  will 
engage  its  influence  to  turn  the  soul  to  the  love  of  him.  Nor 
will  appeals  to  reason  bring  the  enemy  to  yield.  If  such 
appeals  had  always  governed  him,  he  would  not  have  been 
an  enemy  to  God.  Or  if,  before  reason  was  mature,  he 
was  hurried  into  transgression  and  placed  under  the  con- 
demning sentence  of  the  law,  can  mere  appeals  to  reason 
call  back  his  selfish  heart  to  the  love  of  that  purity  which 
reproaches  him  and  of  that  justice  which  annihilates  all  his 
interests?  to  love  that  holy  and  condemning  God  better 
than  himself?  This  is  saying  that  among  all  the  bad  pas- 
sions of  the  universe,  no  wretch  is  too  bad  to  be  controlled 
by  reason  if  reasonable  motives  are  set  clearly  before  him  • 
that  the  rage  of  the  damned  is  nothing  but  a  delusion, — 
the  result  of  a  wrong  judgment  founded  in  prejudice  which 
light  would  correct.  And  then  all  sin  is  the  effect  of 
ignorance,  and  holiness  is  the  unfailing  effect  of  sufficient- 
ly enlarged  knowledge  :  and  then  there  is  nothing  in 
mind, — in  its  temper  or  affections, — to  prevent  it  from 
being  holy  Avhen  sufficiently  enlightened.  But  where  is  the 
proof  of  all  this  ?  Not  in  the  Bible :  not  in  a  single  text : 
and  I  know  that  your  unaided  reason  cannot  pry  so  deep 
as  to  see  all  this,  in  direct  opposition  to  the  word  of  God. 

No  motives  acting  on  the  mind  before  that  causal  in- 
fluence which  produces  love,  will  cause  love.  To  make 
religion   appear  the  greatest  good,  there  must  first  be  a 


OF  MOTIVES.  215 

change  in  the  temper  or  alTections.  And  that  very  ap. 
pearance,  if  made  to  the  whole  mind,  implies  love  ;  if 
made  to  the  understanding  only,  it  will  not  control  the 
heart.  No  intellectual  assent  will  make  religion  appear 
the  greatest  good  to  a  mind  of  bad  affections.  No  ad- 
dresses of  truth  therefore  to  the  understanding  by  God  or 
man,  will  alone  produce  love.  A  heart  that  can  reject 
the  word  of  the  eternal  God,  could  not  be  woft  by  the 
eloquence  of  any  agent.  "  If  they  hear  not  Moses  and 
the  Prophets,  neither  will  they  be  persuaded  though  one 
rose  from  the  dead."*  If  the  Spirit  himself  causes  religion 
to  appear  the  greatest  good,  he  must  first  sanctify  the 
heart. 

But  if  light  cannot  convert  sinners,  why,  you  say,  is  it 
employed  upon  them  ?  It  is  employed  upon  them  to  show 
the  consistency  and  kindness  of  God  in  offering  motives 
which  they  ought  to  use  for  their  good.  Light  is  neces- 
sary also  to  show  them  their  obligations,  guilt,  ruin,  and 
dependence  for  salvation.  And  this  antecedent  convic- 
tion, where  regeneration  ensues,  will  fill  them  with  great- 
er humility,  love,  and  gratitude  all  their  days.  But  on  this 
point  I  have  spoken  so  fully  in  the  seventh  of  the  Park- 
street  Lectures,  that  I  may  hope  to  be  excused  from 
enlarging  here. 

To  prove  that  no  power  is  exerted  upon  us  but 
motives,  confident  appeals  are  often  made  to  our  con- 
sciousness. But  what  does  consciousness  report  ?  Here 
is  a  mind  opposed  to  the  truth.     All  at  once  it  yields  to 

^  Luke  10.  31. 


•210  ALLEGED  DO.MI.MON 

the  same  truth,  \\ithoul  intellectually  discovering  any 
thing  new  in  it ;  only  its  afTections  are  changed,  and  it 
feels  that  the  truth  is  reasonable.  All  at  once,  without 
any  new  and  pressing  view  of  truths  preceding,  more 
than  it  has  had  for  days,  tlie  heart  is  softened  into  love 
and  acquiescence  in  the  divine  will.  Can  you  prove  from 
consciousness  that  nothing  has  been  there  but  motives  ? 

I  kr^ow  that  the  mind,  so  far  as  it  is  consciously  in- 
fluenced, is  moved  by  reasons,  or  it  would  not  act  ration- 
ally. To  this  2)rccise  influence  all  agree  to  refer  those 
texts  which  speak  of  the  instrumentality  of  the  word. 
There  is  no  disagreement  then  about  what  the  Scripture 
expressly  declares  on  this  point.  It  is  admitted  too  on  all 
hands  that  Gjod  is  there  represented  as  the  Author  of 
regeneration.  On  these  two  great  points  we  are  agreed. 
Every  proposition  which  you  claim  to  support  by  an  ex- 
plicit declaration  of  Scripture,  we  admit.  But  you  go 
further.  You  undertake  to  explain  the  mode  of  divine 
operation  by  a  theory  of  your  own.  You  say,  if  God  calls 
forth  the  exercises  of  the  mind  by  motives  presented  to 
the  intellect,  he  does  not  give  dominion  to  motives  by  an 
influence  on  the  heart.  But  the  Bible  says  no  such  thing. 
This  is  an  inference  of  your  own.  Against  that  inference 
I  set  the  foregoing  reasonings,  and  I  fortify  them  by  an  ap- 
peal to  numerous  texts  which  declare  that  the  divine 
operation  is  on  the  heart.  "  A  new  heart  will  I  give  you 
and  a  new  s[)irit  will  I  put  within  you  ;  and  I  will  take 
away  the  stony  heart  out  of  your  flesh,  and  I  will  give  you 
a  heart  of  flesh."  "  Thou  also  hast  wrought  all  our  works 
in  us."     "  The  love  of  God  is  shed  abroad  in  our  hearts 


OP  MOTIVES.  217 

by  the  Holy  Ghost  which  is  given  unto  us."  "  Ye  are — 
the  epistle  of  Christ, — written,  not  with  ink,  but  with 
the  Spirit  of  the  living  God,  not  in  tables  of  stone,  but  in 
fleshly  tables  of  the  heart."  "  I  will  put  my  law  in  their 
inward  parts  and  write  it  in  their  hearts." 

If  we  would  lay  aside  our  systematic  terms  and  our 
attempts  to  explain  the  mode  of  divine  operation,  and  limit 
ourselves  to  the  simple,  intelligible  facts,  we  should  get 
nearer  together.  Our  consciousness  tells  us  that  revealed 
truths  are  the  objects  towards  which  the  mind  acts,  and 
are  the  reasons  which  influence  our  affections  and  voli- 
tions. This  is  all  we  know,  and  all  that  any  of  us,  on 
either  side,  pretends  that  the  Scriptures  teach  about  the 
instrumentality  of  the  word.  And  all  we  know  of  divine 
efficiency  is,  that  God  wills  that  the  mind  should  see  the 
truth,  and  it  sees  it ;  that  the  mind  should  feel  the  truth, 
and  it  feels  it ;  that  the  mind  should  love  the  truth,  and 
it  loves  it.  We  plead  for  nothing  more.  Can  you  look 
far  enough  into  the  secrets  of  nature  to  see  that  it  is  not 
so  1  Can  you  bring  a  single  text  to  prove  that  it  is  not  so  ? 
Even  on  your  plan  you  must  admit  that  God  wills  holiness 
in  those  who  become  holy ;  and  you  cannot  pretend  to 
prove  from  Scripture  or  even  to  conceive  of  any  other  in- 
strumentality of  truth  than  that  it  is  the  object  of  the 
affections  and  the  reason  in  view  of  which  the  soul  acts. 
The  former  is  all  we  ask ;  the  latter  we  fully  admit.  Why 
then  should  there  be  any  dispute  ?  It  all  grows  out  of 
your  attempt  to  explain  the  mode  of  divine  operation  ; 
that  is,  to  theorize  about  the  manner  in  which  truth 
affects  the  natural  susceptibility  to  motives ;  a  point  about 

19 


218  ALLEGED  DOMINION 

which  you  know  nothing  unless  it  is  revealed ;  and  no 
susceptibility  is  revealed  which  dispenses  with  divine 
efficiency.  I  know  that  the  will  which  you  ascribe  to 
God  is  not  efficient.  That  is  the  grand  point  of  dispute, 
brought  up  out  of  the  explanation  of  the  mode.  You  have 
too  a  zeal  for  uncontrolled  liberty  :  but  what  is  uncon- 
trolled liberty  that  is  absolutely  controlled  by  motives  ? 

If,  from  a  notion  that  it  better  comports  with  freedom, 
you  still  insist  that  the  operation  is  on  the  head  ;  what 
matter,  I  ask,  if  the  influence  absolutely  controls,  whether 
it  is  on  the  head  or  heart  1  whether  it  is  before  the  mind , 
by  motives  thrown  into  its  eye,  or  behind  it,  unseen  and 
unfelt  1  You  say,  if  the  mind  is  controlled  by  motives  it 
acts  with  perfect  spontaneity  ;  and  so  it  does  upon  our  plan. 
We  know  that  we  are  willing,  and  therefore  free,  even  if 
we  are  made  willing  in  the  day  of  God's  power.  But  I 
throw  the  odds  against  you.  That  motives  adapted  to  the 
existing  temper  should  control  the  mind,  accords,  not  only 
with  our  most  familiar  experience,  but  with  all  our  notions 
of  liberty.  We  are  moved  by  the  motives  which  please  us. 
But  a  domination  of  motives  that  asks  no  leave  of  the  dis- 
position or  desires,  but  encounters  and  destroys  them  all, 
is  so  new  and  anomalous  a  thing,  that  I  know  not  what  to 
say  of  its  bearing  upon  liberty.  We  may  suppose  a  case 
where  motives  so  overwhelm  the  mind  as  almost  to  take 
away  its  freedom ;  as  where  a  child,  by  horrid  representa- 
tions, is  terrified  into  a  hated  measure.  This  is  a  case 
that  may  be  ;  but  the  other  is  so  unmanageable  in  thought, 
that  I  will  not  pronounce  upon  it  further  than  to  say,  that 
it  has  no  existence  but  in  the  dreams  of  imagination. 


OF  MOTIVES.  219 

That  in  common  matters  God  is  able  at  pleasure  to 
control  the  world  by  motives,  I  fully  admit ;  because  those 
motives  are  adapted  to  the  governing  temper  or  affections, 
and  chiefly  to  self-love  or  the  desire  of  happiness,  w^hich  is 
inseparably  interwoven  with  the  nature  of  all  things  that 
have  life.  But  even  in  common  matters  he  cannot  control 
the  mind  by  motives  opposed  to  the  prevailing  temper  or 
affections ;  much  less,  by  motives  thus  opposed,  can  he 
turn  the  carnal  heart  from  sin  to  holiness. 

One  of  the  writers  already  quoted  says,  "  The  fact  that 
the  individual  is  averse  to  the  truth,  or  to  the  course  which 
the  motive  suggests,  does  not  prove  that  the  motive  can 
exert  no  influence  over  his  decisions  and  his  conduct. 
Adam,  in  a  state  of  holiness,  was  influenced  by  the  motives 
which  Satan  presented. — Moral  suasion  often  influences  us 
to  engage,  with  all  our  hearts,  in  undertakings  to  which 
at  first  we  were  utterly  disinclined.  Motive,  repeatedly 
urged,  often  overcomes  our  reluctance.  If  we  were  already 
inclined  to  the  course,  the  motive  would  be  entirely  use- 
less."' That  temptation  prevailed  with  Adam  before  God's 
influence  was  withdrawn,  is  an  assumption  often  made  by 
those  who  know  that  this  is  denied  by  the  asserters  of  di- 
vine efficiency.  When  brought  therefore  against  this  doc- 
trine, it  is  a  mere  begging  of  the  question.  And  in  regard 
to  the  other  cases  referred  to,  no  one  doubts  that  the  judg- 
ment and  choice  are  often  changed  by  new  truths  present- 
ed; but  the  truths  must  offer  an  apparent  good,  and  for 
this  purpose  must  be  adapted  to  the  prevailing  temper  or 
affections.  If  they  convince  a  man  that  a  change  of  pur- 
pose is  for  his  interest  or  for  that  of  his  friends,  they   are 


•220',  ALLEGED  DOMINION 

adapted  to  self-Jove  or  social  affection,  (which  are  common 
to  all ;)  and  if  not  opposed  by  stronger  motives,  will  pre- 
vail. If  they  convince  a  Christian  that  a  change  of  pur- 
pose is  a  duty  and  will  glorify  God,  they  are  adapted  to  his 
habitual  temper,  and  unless  counteracted  by  some  tempta- 
tion addressed  to  a  sinful  passion,  will  prevail.  But  divine 
truth  can  find  in  the  unregenerate  no  affection  to  address 
but  self-love  inflamed  into  selfishness  and  enmity  against 
God.  And  how  can  its  appeals  to  self-interest  persuade  a 
man  of  such  a  temper  to  subject  that  interest  to  the  glory 
of  God?  If  it  is  the  true  character  of  God  that  is  hated, 
the  truth  throws  light  on  nothing  but  a  hated  object ;  and 
how  can  such  an  illumination  persuade  a  selfish  enemy  to 
love  God  better  than  himself?  Such  an  operation  would 
be  altogether  different  from  that  moral  suasion,  of  every 
liour's  occurence,  which,  in  ordinary  matters,  is  effected 
by  motives  adapted  to  self-love  and  addressed  to  obvious 
interest. 

I  cannot  dismiss  this  subject  without  expressing  my 
high  admiration  of  the  point  and  power  with  which  the 
duty  and  importance  of  immediate  submission  are  urged 
upon  the  impenitent  by  some  of  our  brethren  on  the  other 
side.  In  this  they  are  worthy  of  all  imitation.  And  if  they 
are  ever  to  obtain  any  advantage  over  us  in  point  of  success 
and  consequent  intrenchment  in  the  confidence  of  man- 
kind, it  will  be  exclusively  owing  to  this.  Why  should  not 
the  followers  of  Calvin  and  Edwards  and  Brainerd  wake 
up  to  this  duty  ?  The  way  is  open  for  as  urgent  appeals 
on  our  plan  as  on  theirs.  We  hold  to  a  complete  natural 
abilitv,  the  true  basis  of  obligation.     AVe  know   that  God 


OF  MOTIVES.  221 

commands  immediate  repentance.  It  is  impossible  to  urge 
this  duty  upon  sinners  with  too  high  a  pressure,  unless  our 
language  or  manner  countenances  their  native  self-depend- 
ence. And  we  have  as  much  encouragement  as  our 
brethren  can  have  on  their  principles.  Such  is  the  coin- 
cidence between  natural  and  supernatural  operations,  that 
what  would  prevail  if  there  was  no  supernatural  power,  is 
most  likely  to  prevail  now.  Would  to  God  that  all  the  or- 
thodox would  rise  up  to  an  importunity  with  sinners,  not  to 
be  exceeded  by  either  class  who  deny  the  efficiency  of  the 
eternal  Spirit. 


THE   E  NB 


DATE  DUE 

^^g0m 

m 

\Wm*Vl|*'*Pi 

f 

1 

1 

1 
1 

1 

1 

CAYLORD 

PRINTED  IN  US    A. 

11 


'■*  'T» 


